VADOE adjustments to advanced math track

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VDOE “shut down” de-tracking over six months ago. Doesn’t stop the nutters from shrieking about it though…

Megan McLaughlin said we should keep watching VMPI because they were being incredibly cagey.

Do you consider her a nutter?

No. She is right about the VA DOE.

The DOE has shown they are cagey, duplicitous, and deceptive while trying to pursue their own agenda; specifically: implement VMPI as originally proposed, even over the objections of most parents.

There was no “proposal”. It was very early stages and they were gathering feedback. Done.

In the politics forum, you said it was never suggested.

NP.

Appears you are responding to the notorious VMPI troll.

She will employ pretzel-logic to defend VMPI to the death.

Puzzling part about her recent posts:

- she claims VMPI is “dead,” yet she still bends over backwards to defend it.

Maybe she is well aware that VMPI is not really dead (as she claims).

Rather, the VA DOE is trying to circumvent Governor Youngkin’s EO by incorporating VMPI into the 7-year SOL revision.

- we do not want “blending”

- we do not want advanced math eliminated or watered down

- we reject VMPI’s idea of de-tracking.

In short, we reject VMPI entirely, and we spoke at the ballot box.

Let it go, VMPI troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VDOE “shut down” de-tracking over six months ago. Doesn’t stop the nutters from shrieking about it though…

Megan McLaughlin said we should keep watching VMPI because they were being incredibly cagey.

Do you consider her a nutter?

No. She is right about the VA DOE.

The DOE has shown they are cagey, duplicitous, and deceptive while trying to pursue their own agenda; specifically: implement VMPI as originally proposed, even over the objections of most parents.

There was no “proposal”. It was very early stages and they were gathering feedback. Done.

In the politics forum, you said it was never suggested.

NP.

Appears you are responding to the notorious VMPI troll.

She will employ pretzel-logic to defend VMPI to the death.

Puzzling part about her recent posts:

- she claims VMPI is “dead,” yet she still bends over backwards to defend it.

Maybe she is well aware that VMPI is not really dead (as she claims).

Rather, the VA DOE is trying to circumvent Governor Youngkin’s EO by incorporating VMPI into the 7-year SOL revision.

- we do not want “blending”

- we do not want advanced math eliminated or watered down

- we reject VMPI’s idea of de-tracking.

In short, we reject VMPI entirely, and we spoke at the ballot box.

Let it go, VMPI troll.

Just calling out lies and misinformation. It's a freakin full-time job these days because of you losers.

Facts:
April 2021 - detracking is off the table

January 2022 - VMPI is dead

A very limited update of math SOLs (required by law) <> VMPI


Stop trolling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VDOE “shut down” de-tracking over six months ago. Doesn’t stop the nutters from shrieking about it though…

Megan McLaughlin said we should keep watching VMPI because they were being incredibly cagey.

Do you consider her a nutter?

No. She is right about the VA DOE.

The DOE has shown they are cagey, duplicitous, and deceptive while trying to pursue their own agenda; specifically: implement VMPI as originally proposed, even over the objections of most parents.

There was no “proposal”. It was very early stages and they were gathering feedback. Done.

In the politics forum, you said it was never suggested.

NP.

Appears you are responding to the notorious VMPI troll.

She will employ pretzel-logic to defend VMPI to the death.

Puzzling part about her recent posts:

- she claims VMPI is “dead,” yet she still bends over backwards to defend it.

Maybe she is well aware that VMPI is not really dead (as she claims).

Rather, the VA DOE is trying to circumvent Governor Youngkin’s EO by incorporating VMPI into the 7-year SOL revision.

- we do not want “blending”

- we do not want advanced math eliminated or watered down

- we reject VMPI’s idea of de-tracking.

In short, we reject VMPI entirely, and we spoke at the ballot box.

Let it go, VMPI troll.

Just calling out lies and misinformation. It's a freakin full-time job these days because of you losers.

Facts:
April 2021 - detracking is off the table

January 2022 - VMPI is dead

A very limited update of math SOLs (required by law) <> VMPI


Stop trolling.

- said the notorious VMPI troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VDOE “shut down” de-tracking over six months ago. Doesn’t stop the nutters from shrieking about it though…

Megan McLaughlin said we should keep watching VMPI because they were being incredibly cagey.

Do you consider her a nutter?

No. She is right about the VA DOE.

The DOE has shown they are cagey, duplicitous, and deceptive while trying to pursue their own agenda; specifically: implement VMPI as originally proposed, even over the objections of most parents.

There was no “proposal”. It was very early stages and they were gathering feedback. Done.

In the politics forum, you said it was never suggested.

NP.

Appears you are responding to the notorious VMPI troll.

She will employ pretzel-logic to defend VMPI to the death.

Puzzling part about her recent posts:

- she claims VMPI is “dead,” yet she still bends over backwards to defend it.

Maybe she is well aware that VMPI is not really dead (as she claims).

Rather, the VA DOE is trying to circumvent Governor Youngkin’s EO by incorporating VMPI into the 7-year SOL revision.

- we do not want “blending”

- we do not want advanced math eliminated or watered down

- we reject VMPI’s idea of de-tracking.

In short, we reject VMPI entirely, and we spoke at the ballot box.

Let it go, VMPI troll.

Just calling out lies and misinformation. It's a freakin full-time job these days because of you losers.

Facts:
April 2021 - detracking is off the table

January 2022 - VMPI is dead

A very limited update of math SOLs (required by law) <> VMPI


Stop trolling.

- said the notorious VMPI troll.

Says a parent willing to call out your bullsh1t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the VA DOE plans implement VMPI under a different name.

It is true there is a law requiring a review of the math SOL every 7 years; 2022 is the year.

Looks like DOE will try to disguise VMPI as the periodic math curriculum review.

They plan to have different “pathways” like data science (SOL standards already up for review) instead of calculus. Not sure if they also plan to push more project-based, student-led junk like the VMPI page had.

Don’t think removing math acceleration will be on the table officially. For that keep a hawk eye on E3 here in FCPS. Parents report this program at a few schools is everyone in a clustered local level IV getting “advanced” math, meaning no one is. E3 is FCPS’s plan for advanced math moving forward and parents should be aware of it.

Data Science would be a much better track for my kid than Calculus (same would have been true for me, and I took several years of college math)... I hope that pathway/option makes it into the curriculum before they hit Grade 12 in a few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the VA DOE plans implement VMPI under a different name.

It is true there is a law requiring a review of the math SOL every 7 years; 2022 is the year.

Looks like DOE will try to disguise VMPI as the periodic math curriculum review.

They plan to have different “pathways” like data science (SOL standards already up for review) instead of calculus. Not sure if they also plan to push more project-based, student-led junk like the VMPI page had.

Don’t think removing math acceleration will be on the table officially. For that keep a hawk eye on E3 here in FCPS. Parents report this program at a few schools is everyone in a clustered local level IV getting “advanced” math, meaning no one is. E3 is FCPS’s plan for advanced math moving forward and parents should be aware of it.

Data Science would be a much better track for my kid than Calculus (same would have been true for me, and I took several years of college math)... I hope that pathway/option makes it into the curriculum before they hit Grade 12 in a few years.

I thought that there was a Stats path already?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the VA DOE plans implement VMPI under a different name.

It is true there is a law requiring a review of the math SOL every 7 years; 2022 is the year.

Looks like DOE will try to disguise VMPI as the periodic math curriculum review.

They plan to have different “pathways” like data science (SOL standards already up for review) instead of calculus. Not sure if they also plan to push more project-based, student-led junk like the VMPI page had.

Don’t think removing math acceleration will be on the table officially. For that keep a hawk eye on E3 here in FCPS. Parents report this program at a few schools is everyone in a clustered local level IV getting “advanced” math, meaning no one is. E3 is FCPS’s plan for advanced math moving forward and parents should be aware of it.

Data Science would be a much better track for my kid than Calculus (same would have been true for me, and I took several years of college math)... I hope that pathway/option makes it into the curriculum before they hit Grade 12 in a few years.

I am in favor of bringing back alternate pathways - I think, for example, the old consumer math track, which was destroyed after the EVERYONE MUST GO TO COLLEGE push, offered real value and practical skills for people who took it. But the alternate pathways that DOE was talking about didn't look anything like that. In the VMPI presentation I watched, one of the presenters waxed eloquently about how a high school student looking forward to a nursing or allied health care degree would take a super relevant Data Science class. Relevant to almost no-one in either nursing or allied health. What these students need -- and take formally at many institutions -- is medical math: a course in how to rapidly calculate dosages, IV flow rates, and perform unit conversion, generally through non-approved by VMPI methods, like memorizing multiplication tables.

Anyway, I work in a tangential-to-data-science area and non-calculus data science is mainly going to be a useless collection of buzzwords. Probability & Statistics would be a much better option for a student reasonably solid in algebra.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the VA DOE plans implement VMPI under a different name.

It is true there is a law requiring a review of the math SOL every 7 years; 2022 is the year.

Looks like DOE will try to disguise VMPI as the periodic math curriculum review.

They plan to have different “pathways” like data science (SOL standards already up for review) instead of calculus. Not sure if they also plan to push more project-based, student-led junk like the VMPI page had.

Don’t think removing math acceleration will be on the table officially. For that keep a hawk eye on E3 here in FCPS. Parents report this program at a few schools is everyone in a clustered local level IV getting “advanced” math, meaning no one is. E3 is FCPS’s plan for advanced math moving forward and parents should be aware of it.

Data Science would be a much better track for my kid than Calculus (same would have been true for me, and I took several years of college math)... I hope that pathway/option makes it into the curriculum before they hit Grade 12 in a few years.

I am in favor of bringing back alternate pathways - I think, for example, the old consumer math track, which was destroyed after the EVERYONE MUST GO TO COLLEGE push, offered real value and practical skills for people who took it. But the alternate pathways that DOE was talking about didn't look anything like that. In the VMPI presentation I watched, one of the presenters waxed eloquently about how a high school student looking forward to a nursing or allied health care degree would take a super relevant Data Science class. Relevant to almost no-one in either nursing or allied health. What these students need -- and take formally at many institutions -- is medical math: a course in how to rapidly calculate dosages, IV flow rates, and perform unit conversion, generally through non-approved by VMPI methods, like memorizing multiplication tables.

Anyway, I work in a tangential-to-data-science area and non-calculus data science is mainly going to be a useless collection of buzzwords. Probability & Statistics would be a much better option for a student reasonably solid in algebra.

+1 million. Data science is trendy, but what they are talking about doing is pointless according to the data scientists I know/work with. I'm a programmer who loves the book The Math Myth, and that book delves into exactly the kind of alternate pathways you talk about PP - real math skills used on the job that are advanced arithmetic of the kind modern math classes really don't teach. Yes, we need a pathway that lets kids take linear algebra in high school (highly useful if you are going into computing or engineering) and a pathway for kids who definitely don't want to do that. But data science is NOT the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the VA DOE plans implement VMPI under a different name.

It is true there is a law requiring a review of the math SOL every 7 years; 2022 is the year.

Looks like DOE will try to disguise VMPI as the periodic math curriculum review.

They plan to have different “pathways” like data science (SOL standards already up for review) instead of calculus. Not sure if they also plan to push more project-based, student-led junk like the VMPI page had.

Don’t think removing math acceleration will be on the table officially. For that keep a hawk eye on E3 here in FCPS. Parents report this program at a few schools is everyone in a clustered local level IV getting “advanced” math, meaning no one is. E3 is FCPS’s plan for advanced math moving forward and parents should be aware of it.

Data Science would be a much better track for my kid than Calculus (same would have been true for me, and I took several years of college math)... I hope that pathway/option makes it into the curriculum before they hit Grade 12 in a few years.

I am in favor of bringing back alternate pathways - I think, for example, the old consumer math track, which was destroyed after the EVERYONE MUST GO TO COLLEGE push, offered real value and practical skills for people who took it. But the alternate pathways that DOE was talking about didn't look anything like that. In the VMPI presentation I watched, one of the presenters waxed eloquently about how a high school student looking forward to a nursing or allied health care degree would take a super relevant Data Science class. Relevant to almost no-one in either nursing or allied health. What these students need -- and take formally at many institutions -- is medical math: a course in how to rapidly calculate dosages, IV flow rates, and perform unit conversion, generally through non-approved by VMPI methods, like memorizing multiplication tables.

Anyway, I work in a tangential-to-data-science area and non-calculus data science is mainly going to be a useless collection of buzzwords. Probability & Statistics would be a much better option for a student reasonably solid in algebra.

Really? Seems like there is a ton that doesn’t require calculus.

These skills seem more helpful than calculus to anyone who has to manipulate a data set in a professional environment (not STEM):

https://hsdatascience.youcubed.org/curriculum/

https://www.ucladatascienceed.org/introduction-to-data-science-curriculum

“ This curriculum will introduce students to the main ideas in data science through free tools such as Google Sheets, Python, Data Commons and Tableau. Students will learn to be data explorers in project-based units, through which they will develop their understanding of data analysis, sampling, correlation/causation, bias and uncertainty, probability, modeling with data, making and evaluating data-based arguments, the power of data in society, and more! At the end of the course students will have a portfolio of their data science work to showcase their newly developed abilities.”

[Anonymous]

I know how to properly use Logits, Probits, Regressions, and can run simultaneous equations with the best of them. I know the diagnostic tools to run, what questions to ask to use the best fit and most approrpiate method, how to correct various issues. I never had calculus and I cannot do the proofs for the various probability distributions and applications but I can still understand the stats and how to use them properly.

There is a lot you can do in this world without calculus.

DS is on track for Algebra in 7th grade and will take Calculus and other advanced math because he loves math. He loves the competitions and he wants to do math. Which is great. More power to him.

There is already a math track that includes data and stats that is not Calculus based so I am not so certain why we need to adjust this. Maybeit is more about adjusting parents expectations and how we guide students then changing the existing tracks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know how to properly use Logits, Probits, Regressions, and can run simultaneous equations with the best of them. I know the diagnostic tools to run, what questions to ask to use the best fit and most approrpiate method, how to correct various issues. I never had calculus and I cannot do the proofs for the various probability distributions and applications but I can still understand the stats and how to use them properly.

There is a lot you can do in this world without calculus.

DS is on track for Algebra in 7th grade and will take Calculus and other advanced math because he loves math. He loves the competitions and he wants to do math. Which is great. More power to him.

There is already a math track that includes data and stats that is not Calculus based so I am not so certain why we need to adjust this. Maybeit is more about adjusting parents expectations and how we guide students then changing the existing tracks.

So you have never taken calculus? Or taught HS math? Or college math?

Just how familiar with the curriculum and pathways are you? And how are you able to meaningfully gauge how well the curriculum meets the needs of various students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the VA DOE plans implement VMPI under a different name.

It is true there is a law requiring a review of the math SOL every 7 years; 2022 is the year.

Looks like DOE will try to disguise VMPI as the periodic math curriculum review.

They plan to have different “pathways” like data science (SOL standards already up for review) instead of calculus. Not sure if they also plan to push more project-based, student-led junk like the VMPI page had.

Don’t think removing math acceleration will be on the table officially. For that keep a hawk eye on E3 here in FCPS. Parents report this program at a few schools is everyone in a clustered local level IV getting “advanced” math, meaning no one is. E3 is FCPS’s plan for advanced math moving forward and parents should be aware of it.

Data Science would be a much better track for my kid than Calculus (same would have been true for me, and I took several years of college math)... I hope that pathway/option makes it into the curriculum before they hit Grade 12 in a few years.

I am in favor of bringing back alternate pathways - I think, for example, the old consumer math track, which was destroyed after the EVERYONE MUST GO TO COLLEGE push, offered real value and practical skills for people who took it. But the alternate pathways that DOE was talking about didn't look anything like that. In the VMPI presentation I watched, one of the presenters waxed eloquently about how a high school student looking forward to a nursing or allied health care degree would take a super relevant Data Science class. Relevant to almost no-one in either nursing or allied health. What these students need -- and take formally at many institutions -- is medical math: a course in how to rapidly calculate dosages, IV flow rates, and perform unit conversion, generally through non-approved by VMPI methods, like memorizing multiplication tables.

Anyway, I work in a tangential-to-data-science area and non-calculus data science is mainly going to be a useless collection of buzzwords. Probability & Statistics would be a much better option for a student reasonably solid in algebra.

Really? Seems like there is a ton that doesn’t require calculus.

These skills seem more helpful than calculus to anyone who has to manipulate a data set in a professional environment (not STEM):

https://hsdatascience.youcubed.org/curriculum/

https://www.ucladatascienceed.org/introduction-to-data-science-curriculum

“ This curriculum will introduce students to the main ideas in data science through free tools such as Google Sheets, Python, Data Commons and Tableau. Students will learn to be data explorers in project-based units, through which they will develop their understanding of data analysis, sampling, correlation/causation, bias and uncertainty, probability, modeling with data, making and evaluating data-based arguments, the power of data in society, and more! At the end of the course students will have a portfolio of their data science work to showcase their newly developed abilities.”

Sheesh, they're planning on doing Python's data science modules? Are they making computer science a prereq?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the VA DOE plans implement VMPI under a different name.

It is true there is a law requiring a review of the math SOL every 7 years; 2022 is the year.

Looks like DOE will try to disguise VMPI as the periodic math curriculum review.

They plan to have different “pathways” like data science (SOL standards already up for review) instead of calculus. Not sure if they also plan to push more project-based, student-led junk like the VMPI page had.

Don’t think removing math acceleration will be on the table officially. For that keep a hawk eye on E3 here in FCPS. Parents report this program at a few schools is everyone in a clustered local level IV getting “advanced” math, meaning no one is. E3 is FCPS’s plan for advanced math moving forward and parents should be aware of it.

Data Science would be a much better track for my kid than Calculus (same would have been true for me, and I took several years of college math)... I hope that pathway/option makes it into the curriculum before they hit Grade 12 in a few years.

I am in favor of bringing back alternate pathways - I think, for example, the old consumer math track, which was destroyed after the EVERYONE MUST GO TO COLLEGE push, offered real value and practical skills for people who took it. But the alternate pathways that DOE was talking about didn't look anything like that. In the VMPI presentation I watched, one of the presenters waxed eloquently about how a high school student looking forward to a nursing or allied health care degree would take a super relevant Data Science class. Relevant to almost no-one in either nursing or allied health. What these students need -- and take formally at many institutions -- is medical math: a course in how to rapidly calculate dosages, IV flow rates, and perform unit conversion, generally through non-approved by VMPI methods, like memorizing multiplication tables.

Anyway, I work in a tangential-to-data-science area and non-calculus data science is mainly going to be a useless collection of buzzwords. Probability & Statistics would be a much better option for a student reasonably solid in algebra.

Really? Seems like there is a ton that doesn’t require calculus.

These skills seem more helpful than calculus to anyone who has to manipulate a data set in a professional environment (not STEM):

https://hsdatascience.youcubed.org/curriculum/

https://www.ucladatascienceed.org/introduction-to-data-science-curriculum

“ This curriculum will introduce students to the main ideas in data science through free tools such as Google Sheets, Python, Data Commons and Tableau. Students will learn to be data explorers in project-based units, through which they will develop their understanding of data analysis, sampling, correlation/causation, bias and uncertainty, probability, modeling with data, making and evaluating data-based arguments, the power of data in society, and more! At the end of the course students will have a portfolio of their data science work to showcase their newly developed abilities.”

Sheesh, they're planning on doing Python's data science modules? Are they making computer science a prereq?

I'm sure most kids will having some kind of programming skills by that point, but it doesn't look like it's required.

This particular curriculum uses Colab to guide students through a taste of what Python can do:
https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1lgAV2IYcMTKIKJ-ziQALO34PXZQiiGz-

Pretty cool. Probably fun than Matlab for most people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know how to properly use Logits, Probits, Regressions, and can run simultaneous equations with the best of them. I know the diagnostic tools to run, what questions to ask to use the best fit and most approrpiate method, how to correct various issues. I never had calculus and I cannot do the proofs for the various probability distributions and applications but I can still understand the stats and how to use them properly.

There is a lot you can do in this world without calculus.

DS is on track for Algebra in 7th grade and will take Calculus and other advanced math because he loves math. He loves the competitions and he wants to do math. Which is great. More power to him.

There is already a math track that includes data and stats that is not Calculus based so I am not so certain why we need to adjust this. Maybeit is more about adjusting parents expectations and how we guide students then changing the existing tracks.

As the skeptical person you were probably responding to, it's not that I don't think someone can do data science without calculus, it's that I think a high school class in data science without calculus isn't going to be worth anything. The "data science" pathway, as described, was intended for populations like pre-nursing students, and was not intended to require a stats background. The course would have to be *really* watered down in order to not fail the significant fraction of the students who couldn't make heads or tails of e.g. using Python to clean up a dataset, and it would have been.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the VA DOE plans implement VMPI under a different name.

It is true there is a law requiring a review of the math SOL every 7 years; 2022 is the year.

Looks like DOE will try to disguise VMPI as the periodic math curriculum review.

They plan to have different “pathways” like data science (SOL standards already up for review) instead of calculus. Not sure if they also plan to push more project-based, student-led junk like the VMPI page had.

Don’t think removing math acceleration will be on the table officially. For that keep a hawk eye on E3 here in FCPS. Parents report this program at a few schools is everyone in a clustered local level IV getting “advanced” math, meaning no one is. E3 is FCPS’s plan for advanced math moving forward and parents should be aware of it.

Data Science would be a much better track for my kid than Calculus (same would have been true for me, and I took several years of college math)... I hope that pathway/option makes it into the curriculum before they hit Grade 12 in a few years.

I am in favor of bringing back alternate pathways - I think, for example, the old consumer math track, which was destroyed after the EVERYONE MUST GO TO COLLEGE push, offered real value and practical skills for people who took it. But the alternate pathways that DOE was talking about didn't look anything like that. In the VMPI presentation I watched, one of the presenters waxed eloquently about how a high school student looking forward to a nursing or allied health care degree would take a super relevant Data Science class. Relevant to almost no-one in either nursing or allied health. What these students need -- and take formally at many institutions -- is medical math: a course in how to rapidly calculate dosages, IV flow rates, and perform unit conversion, generally through non-approved by VMPI methods, like memorizing multiplication tables.

Anyway, I work in a tangential-to-data-science area and non-calculus data science is mainly going to be a useless collection of buzzwords. Probability & Statistics would be a much better option for a student reasonably solid in algebra.

Really? Seems like there is a ton that doesn’t require calculus.

These skills seem more helpful than calculus to anyone who has to manipulate a data set in a professional environment (not STEM):

https://hsdatascience.youcubed.org/curriculum/

https://www.ucladatascienceed.org/introduction-to-data-science-curriculum

“ This curriculum will introduce students to the main ideas in data science through free tools such as Google Sheets, Python, Data Commons and Tableau. Students will learn to be data explorers in project-based units, through which they will develop their understanding of data analysis, sampling, correlation/causation, bias and uncertainty, probability, modeling with data, making and evaluating data-based arguments, the power of data in society, and more! At the end of the course students will have a portfolio of their data science work to showcase their newly developed abilities.”

Sheesh, they're planning on doing Python's data science modules? Are they making computer science a prereq?

I'm sure most kids will having some kind of programming skills by that point, but it doesn't look like it's required.

This particular curriculum uses Colab to guide students through a taste of what Python can do:
https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1lgAV2IYcMTKIKJ-ziQALO34PXZQiiGz-

Pretty cool. Probably fun than Matlab for most people.

I read that link as a programmer who can code Python (though I don't day to day). I'm trying to remember being 14 and learning C and wondering if I could use that code to do my own work, and I'm not sure I could have, but it's been a long time.