Harvard is not alone. UC students Without 8th Grade Math Skills Skyrockets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, the math thing is crazy these days. My kid is at an Ivy and was given a math placement test at the beginning of freshman year. He took Calculus AB in high school and was placed into Calculus 2. However it turns out that almost all his classmates took BC in high school. Except most did not actually learn the BC because they are now getting Cs and Ds in this course (the average on the exams has been in the 60s).
My kid has had two 99% so far and he is a humanities kid. He attended a grade-deflating, private high school which rarely accelerated kids in math.

How are these kids getting 60% on material that they already took in high school? And yet of course they got high As in high school as they got into an Ivy.

The state of high school math education is worrisome.

Those kids probably also got 5s on the AP test. My humanities kid at a UC is very scared of taking math next quarter. He placed into UC’s last Calculus level which is supposedly after BC not sure if that maps to II or III . He had As in high school, 5 on the AP exam and 780 on SAT math but he’s hearing from so many kids with similar stats who are getting Cs and Ds and who are engineering kids that like math.

Is the problem these kids are not learning the material or are they not retaining the material? If they are indeed earning 5s on an AP exam then I would argue the latter... How do you fix that? I don't know.

The College Board has been explicitly making AP tests easier, because they found that they were losing kids to lightweight dual enrollment classes. I will give you three guesses as to the likely response by the providers of those dual enrollment classes, and the first two don't count.

And yet still so few still get all 5s! Both my sons scored 5s on every exam with no outside study/prep.

That's what's so embarrassing about this. It's easy to get 5s on all the exams. This is why international students smoke all the domestic students in college.

No, and no. 10-12% get 5s on almost all AP exams. And no, international students don't "smoke all domestic students in college."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:California originally set up UC to serve the top 20% of students in the STATE not by high school, provide graduate programs and degrees and conduct research, Cal State was designed to take the next lower 20%, provide a combination of 4 year liberal arts or technical/vocational degree and provide degrees in education. If you wanted to be a nurse, a teacher, get a business degree, hospitality, medical tech, engineering etc Cal State was there even if you weren’t a top student.

When CA removed race based admissions, Cal came up with a way to use proxy measures and switch to admitting within the top 20% by school. The others followed this approach. It’s not working well for anyone.

No, your numbers are not correct. The Master Plan for higher education in CA:

University of California (UC): For the top 12.5% of high school graduates, focusing on research and advanced education. Only UC’s have doctoral programs (with a few exceptions) and law/medical schools.

California State University (CSU): For the top 33.3% of graduates, providing broader education and career-focused training.

California Community Colleges (CCC): Open to all students, emphasizing vocational education and the first two years of undergraduate preparation.

UC’s use BOTH eligibility in local context to identify the top 9% at each high school AND they run a top 9% in the state. My son went to a really competitive high school. He was not in the top 9% of his high school but his application was marked top 9% in the state. For the top 9% in the state they look at GPA and how many UC honors designated classes as well as /AP/ CC classes you have taken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The low performers at UC San Diego are URM's, English-learners.

It is a function of how UC San Diego selected their student body. They selected more applicants from poorer, English-learning schools.

I'm not sure how to correct it, but it seems to be common sense that putting students in an environment where they are destined to fail does no one any good.

Either UC San Diego just hands out degrees like candy and the institution's reputation suffers or they give up on admitting students with elementary school-level abilitites.

You seem to think they did this to help people? It’s just high-level virtue signaling.

It is too ensure that they have wide based political support in CA.

+1 which is an appropriate aim for a public university

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it good that they are catching this and students can learn math properly? Some high schools don't have good math teachers. Not everyone is able to go to good public/private schools with good teaching. Also, the fact that numbers have tripled in recent years probably has to do with covid, online learning, and just bad math teachers.

They don't belong in colleges.

[Anonymous]

"UCSD: 1 in 8 incoming freshman have math skills that fall below an 8th-grade level."

LMFAO this school is ranked #29
Something is seriously wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"UCSD: 1 in 8 incoming freshman have math skills that fall below an 8th-grade level."

LMFAO this school is ranked #29
Something is seriously wrong.

1 in 8 are *known* to have math skills that fall at 8th grade, or below.

If I read the table in the report correctly, there is another large group of students that aren't required to take any math. Not entirely improbable that the true number of kids at UCSD with bottom of the barrel math capabilities is somewhere around 1 in 4.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"UCSD: 1 in 8 incoming freshman have math skills that fall below an 8th-grade level."

LMFAO this school is ranked #29
Something is seriously wrong.

When US News switched to ranking equity factors more heavily than academic ones, that's how you get such an implausible ranking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ironically, the students who major in sociology, ethnic studies and other soft subjects end up being the ones working in education administration and setting admissions policy, where they proceed to favor other students like them in the admissions process. part of the problem is that administrators and not actual faculty have taken control of the admissions process and student evaluation methods.

This!! It’s not being talked about enough. This is why there’s so much stupidity in education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ironically, the students who major in sociology, ethnic studies and other soft subjects end up being the ones working in education administration and setting admissions policy, where they proceed to favor other students like them in the admissions process. part of the problem is that administrators and not actual faculty have taken control of the admissions process and student evaluation methods.

This!! It’s not being talked about enough. This is why there’s so much stupidity in education

While I agree that the type of person who becomes an admissions officer is not the best and brightest, they are not in control. They simple execute the directive that comes from senior leadership. It’s the board, chancellor, deans etc and it is very much a business decision. UCSD is extremely strong in some majors. If the rankings didn’t push them to admit so many kids who don’t belong there, they wouldn’t do it. They need the high ranking to attract international and out of state students for money. All UCs struggle with yield from this population so the rankings matter to them.

My son has friends who had tippy top stats, really smart and nice kids who worked incredibly hard and were rejected from every UC except Merced. They are at Purdue, Carnegie Mellon, UIUC, and Cornell doing great but racking up debt They would have loved to go to Cal, UCLA, Irvine, Davis, SD, SB or even Santa Cruz! Instead of accepting the kid that is getting top grades at Cornell, UCSD chose someone who has math skills below a middle schooler.

[Anonymous]

It sure seems like college is now like high school was thirty years ago. Essentially, high schools have thrown up their arms and given up, leaving colleges to teach remedial skills. Another way to look at it is that we were right in the 1970s; a good 2/3 of high schoolers don't belong on a college track; college should be for those who actually want to learn, not for its "career prospects." We probably have 50% too many colleges (conservatively,) and about about 1 million too few shop teachers. What a mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dirty little secret of the UC's is that they select a certain percentage from each high school, whether that high school is an overperforming one in Palo Alto or Irvine or an underperforming one in LAUSD.

Prior to tests being banned, the average SAT scores were low, below 1300 at most campuses.

Now that SATs are banned, the equity drive has seen the UC system oversubscribed with low performing students.

Hopefully these students can get the remediation they deserve so they can thrive in more difficult classes.

I’m confused. This isn’t a dirty secret but what most public university systems do. Look at conservative Texas, The UT and A&M system have exactly this and they find ways to make it work. If you want uber competitive only rich white/asian colleges, there’s many top privates to choose from.

UT found the way to make it work: UT is test required and that makes all the difference.

Haha how naive. https://catalog.utexas.edu/search/?P=M%20301" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://catalog.utexas.edu/search/?P=M%20301

M 301 (TCCN: MATH 1314). College Algebra.

Subjects include a brief review of elementary algebra; linear, quadratic, exponential, and logarithmic functions; polynomials; systems of linear equations; applications. Three lecture hours a week for one semester. May not be counted toward a degree in mathematics. Credit for Mathematics 301 may not be earned after a student has received credit for any calculus course with a grade of C- or better. Prerequisite: A passing score on the mathematics section of the Texas Higher Education Assessment (THEA) test (or an appropriate assessment test).

M 301 is the lowest-level "precalculus" course we offer. It should be an honest college algebra course, that is, not an intermediate algebra course (which is offered by community colleges and some four-year colleges and which is often equivalent to second-year high school algebra.) This syllabus is written for use in summer school (the only time we offer M 301). It assumes 26 lectures.
Chapter 1 Five Fundamental Themes 5 sections 4 lectures
Chapter 2 Algebraic Expressions 5 sections 4 lectures
Chapter 3 Equations and Inequalities 5 sections 5 lectures
Chapter 4 Graphs and Functions 4 sections 4 lectures
Chapter 5 Polynomial and Rational Functions 4 sections 4 lectures
Chapter 6 Exponential, Logarithmic Functions 4 sections 3 lectures
Chapter 7 Systems of Equations, Inequalities 3 sections 2 lectures

Tests aren’t saving you from this incompetent generation.

The education system is clearly failing in a lot of schools. High school students are not incompetent. That is ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

My guess is that if they did a broader study across all in state CA students comparing public schools that used Integrated Math versus ones that dropped it and do Algebra / Geometry/ Trig / separately they would find lower scores across low income groups in IM.

We moved to CA from MCPS. The elementary school math was fine , no Curriculum 2.0 thank god. Actual tests, textbook, real math, homework graded and a nice option was that if you finished the in class work really fast you could do challenge questions in a group with other kids. It fell apart in middle school and high school. Integrated math is truly the Frankenstein creation of people who don’t understand math. The textbook is hilariously bad. It’s all questions that make no sense unless you’ve learned math somewhere else. It’s not accelerated, it’s two years behind MCPS. Homework was never graded, just stamped on a separate page. Tests and quizzes were always group based. DD who had done Algebra in MCPS was super popular because she quickly did the answers while others were clueless. The only kids that learned any math were the kids whose parents had them doing UC Scout, Khan, Russian Math etc. This continued into high school. AP Calculus classes are solely made up of kids who learn math outside of school. IM leaves way too many gaps.

This gets masked in wealthy areas where parents realize how bad it is and just make their kids learn math outside the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ironically, the students who major in sociology, ethnic studies and other soft subjects end up being the ones working in education administration and setting admissions policy, where they proceed to favor other students like them in the admissions process. part of the problem is that administrators and not actual faculty have taken control of the admissions process and student evaluation methods.

This!! It’s not being talked about enough. This is why there’s so much stupidity in education

While I agree that the type of person who becomes an admissions officer is not the best and brightest, they are not in control. They simple execute the directive that comes from senior leadership. It’s the board, chancellor, deans etc and it is very much a business decision. UCSD is extremely strong in some majors. If the rankings didn’t push them to admit so many kids who don’t belong there, they wouldn’t do it. They need the high ranking to attract international and out of state students for money. All UCs struggle with yield from this population so the rankings matter to them.

My son has friends who had tippy top stats, really smart and nice kids who worked incredibly hard and were rejected from every UC except Merced. They are at Purdue, Carnegie Mellon, UIUC, and Cornell doing great but racking up debt They would have loved to go to Cal, UCLA, Irvine, Davis, SD, SB or even Santa Cruz! Instead of accepting the kid that is getting top grades at Cornell, UCSD chose someone who has math skills below a middle schooler.

No kid who could get into those schools was rejected from UCSC or UCR. Sorry mom, that just isn't true except for possibly a non CS major at UIUC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My guess is that if they did a broader study across all in state CA students comparing public schools that used Integrated Math versus ones that dropped it and do Algebra / Geometry/ Trig / separately they would find lower scores across low income groups in IM.

We moved to CA from MCPS. The elementary school math was fine , no Curriculum 2.0 thank god. Actual tests, textbook, real math, homework graded and a nice option was that if you finished the in class work really fast you could do challenge questions in a group with other kids. It fell apart in middle school and high school. Integrated math is truly the Frankenstein creation of people who don’t understand math. The textbook is hilariously bad. It’s all questions that make no sense unless you’ve learned math somewhere else. It’s not accelerated, it’s two years behind MCPS. Homework was never graded, just stamped on a separate page. Tests and quizzes were always group based. DD who had done Algebra in MCPS was super popular because she quickly did the answers while others were clueless. The only kids that learned any math were the kids whose parents had them doing UC Scout, Khan, Russian Math etc. This continued into high school. AP Calculus classes are solely made up of kids who learn math outside of school. IM leaves way too many gaps.

This gets masked in wealthy areas where parents realize how bad it is and just make their kids learn math outside the school.

In most parts of CA the wealthy just send their kids to private schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ironically, the students who major in sociology, ethnic studies and other soft subjects end up being the ones working in education administration and setting admissions policy, where they proceed to favor other students like them in the admissions process. part of the problem is that administrators and not actual faculty have taken control of the admissions process and student evaluation methods.

This!! It’s not being talked about enough. This is why there’s so much stupidity in education

While I agree that the type of person who becomes an admissions officer is not the best and brightest, they are not in control. They simple execute the directive that comes from senior leadership. It’s the board, chancellor, deans etc and it is very much a business decision. UCSD is extremely strong in some majors. If the rankings didn’t push them to admit so many kids who don’t belong there, they wouldn’t do it. They need the high ranking to attract international and out of state students for money. All UCs struggle with yield from this population so the rankings matter to them.

My son has friends who had tippy top stats, really smart and nice kids who worked incredibly hard and were rejected from every UC except Merced. They are at Purdue, Carnegie Mellon, UIUC, and Cornell doing great but racking up debt They would have loved to go to Cal, UCLA, Irvine, Davis, SD, SB or even Santa Cruz! Instead of accepting the kid that is getting top grades at Cornell, UCSD chose someone who has math skills below a middle schooler.

No kid who could get into those schools was rejected from UCSC or UCR. Sorry mom, that just isn't true except for possibly a non CS major at UIUC.

100% true yes engineering not CS all Asian boys and one white boy. The Purdue and Cornell kids were NMSF kids. The girls do a little better. 60-70% of the top 6 UC school admits from our school were girls.