Automatically enrolled into Algebra 1 honors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe algebra 1 in grade 6 is to make the parents happy.
I don’t think most of the kids enjoy doing homework and math, instead of reading, sports or playing with friends or watching tv.

Very very few kids are really passionate about math and enjoy high school level math when they are 11-12 years old. If half of the AAP classes are taking it then it’s only because parents are forcing it on their kids.

Kind of like bragging rights. Also, this Superintendent seems to make decisions without listening to her content experts within FCPS - who have stated that this is t a good idea.

Parents were never really short on bragging rights anyway, with reading levels, year-round travel team, music achievements, contest wins, and all that. just add alg1 to that list. who cares...

Superintendent is making decisions after listening to parents of advanced kids. We asked for it, and we got it. A few gen-ed loving parents that dont like it, can just Opt Out. Six hundred kids like the program, and that's what matters.

I’m an AAP parent who sees this as nothing more than a race to nowhere. What I’m trying to understand is why these advanced AAP 6th graders couldn’t make the cut under the old standards? Why did you have to petition to remove all prerequisites to get your kid access?

DP. The old standards that produced 30 Algebra I 6th graders was very flawed and denied access to quite a lot of capable kids. In the old system, AAP 5th graders were skipped up into AAP 6th grade math during 5th grade. This is great, because rather than effectively skipping both math 7 and 8, they skipped math 6, took AAP 6th grade math which at many large centers is designed to prepare kids for algebra the next year, and then skipped math 8. But, the down side is that the logistics of skipping a bunch of kids into a higher grade level class meant that a lot of principals didn't want to offer it at all. Quite a lot of kids met all of the benchmarks and were ready for Algebra I in 6th, but the principal didn't offer it at their school, so they were out of luck.

The qualification standards in the old system were also really dumb. One of the requirements was a 145+ on the CogAT Q test from 2nd grade. Using a test from the fall of 2nd grade for 5th grade math placement is idiotic. A lot of kids who didn't qualify almost certainly could have with an updated test or more relevant qualification metrics.

I would imagine that part of the change is that when they started offering the MAP, they found that quite a lot of kids were above the threshold score indicating readiness for algebra. It makes a lot of sense to offer algebra to the kids who have demonstrated that they're ready.

I have no idea why they removed any MAP thresholds for algebra. Since they already have the testing data, they should know which kids are likely to struggle. At the very least, parents should be informed as to what their child's score was relative to the 'readiness' threshold, and what that likely means for their child should they enroll in Algebra.

[Anonymous]

I think it's possible FCPS will get the reputation at elite colleges of being "that school system that waters down math so that everyone looks accelerated"... I guess we'll see.

[Anonymous]

A good read. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/when-are-students-ready-for-algebra/?hl=en-US#:~:text=And%20students%20who%20complete%20Algebra,negative%20consequences%20on%20their%20achievement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe algebra 1 in grade 6 is to make the parents happy.
I don’t think most of the kids enjoy doing homework and math, instead of reading, sports or playing with friends or watching tv.

Very very few kids are really passionate about math and enjoy high school level math when they are 11-12 years old. If half of the AAP classes are taking it then it’s only because parents are forcing it on their kids.

Kind of like bragging rights. Also, this Superintendent seems to make decisions without listening to her content experts within FCPS - who have stated that this is t a good idea.

Parents were never really short on bragging rights anyway, with reading levels, year-round travel team, music achievements, contest wins, and all that. just add alg1 to that list. who cares...

Superintendent is making decisions after listening to parents of advanced kids. We asked for it, and we got it. A few gen-ed loving parents that dont like it, can just Opt Out. Six hundred kids like the program, and that's what matters.

I’m an AAP parent who sees this as nothing more than a race to nowhere. What I’m trying to understand is why these advanced AAP 6th graders couldn’t make the cut under the old standards? Why did you have to petition to remove all prerequisites to get your kid access?

Why worry about other advanced kids who are thriving with Algebra 1? We asked for advanced math offering, and our kids got it and are happy with it.

You’re being given the option to opt out and stick with the standard AAP math track. Is anyone forcing you or your kid to do alg1?

Because the poster's kid is smart but not ready for Algebra I in 6th. They don't want all these other kids getting an advantage in college applications by default. They'd rather only the ones with informed, striver parents opt in and the smart kids whose parents don't read DCUM or even emails from the school stay behind with their kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think they introduced Algebra 1 in 6th grade, to give those kids/ parents who want to be super advanced in math an option to do so.
Since they have changed TJ admissions criteria, this may or may not affect TJ admissions. And may not affect college admissions depending on the major selected.
A student who has competed algebra 1 and geometry with A grade may have an edge over a student who accelerated due to patents pushing just to brag that their 6th grader is in algebra 1 and is a math prodigy, but struggled and got B, B- or C.

What kind of silly reasoning is that? Do you really think FCPS is making decisions based on parents wanting bragging rights? My student and many of their 6th grade friends are doing enjoying Algebra 1. It’s not super or advanced advanced, just a solid challenge that keeps them from getting bored in math.

That's the thing. I haven't heard a reason behind all of this. Where's the research? Where's the why? It seems like a whim.

Real leadership isn’t always about relying on "research", or waiting for a study or a past example to justify every move. Otherwise you just keep repeating the same old outcomes. What Reed is trying to do is break that pattern that only kids with well-off middle class highly involved parents can succeed in advanced math. Instead, FCPS wants to show that students from poor families without that background can do just as well, if only they are provided a similar challenging environment in a public school classroom.

That's a whim and a pie in the sky attitude. Throwing these "poor families" into the wind and saying, "Fly! Fly! I know you can do it!" And all at the same time, not listening to teachers. Not listening to parents.

Without getting into the lack of academic prerequisites for Algebra in 7th grade (which I believe was the original impetus for this thread), it seems so inconsistent to treat homework as a barrier to equity in the early grades and then throw all the kids into an advanced math course that's two years ahead of the standard curriculum. Historically, working hard and succeeding in school has been key to the upward mobility of lower SES kids. Why not apply an appropriate qualifier for all the kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A good read. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/when-are-students-ready-for-algebra/?hl=en-US#:~:text=And%20students%20who%20complete%20Algebra,negative%20consequences%20on%20their%20achievement.

"Students needed to score around a 235 to 238 on MAP Growth in the spring of seventh grade to be on track to score proficient at the end of an Algebra 1 course. "

A 50% chance of being only proficient? I assume proficient in this case means passing, not outright mastery. Sounds like a low bar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good read. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/when-are-students-ready-for-algebra/?hl=en-US#:~:text=And%20students%20who%20complete%20Algebra,negative%20consequences%20on%20their%20achievement.

"Students needed to score around a 235 to 238 on MAP Growth in the spring of seventh grade to be on track to score proficient at the end of an Algebra 1 course. "

A 50% chance of being only proficient? I assume proficient in this case means passing, not outright mastery. Sounds like a low bar.

very low bar. my 4th grader was above this # in the fall

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good read. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/when-are-students-ready-for-algebra/?hl=en-US#:~:text=And%20students%20who%20complete%20Algebra,negative%20consequences%20on%20their%20achievement.

"Students needed to score around a 235 to 238 on MAP Growth in the spring of seventh grade to be on track to score proficient at the end of an Algebra 1 course. "

A 50% chance of being only proficient? I assume proficient in this case means passing, not outright mastery. Sounds like a low bar.

This was an eye-opener. The author of the article said that of the kids with a 235-238 on the MAP, 50% of those kids could probably handle it, and 50% could struggle with it. He said it would be understandable for a school district to raise the bar and require more preparation and proficiency for Algebra I. Mine has a 245 on MAP in the 6th, and I don't think she's ready to take a high school course that will go on her transcript. Sure, maybe she'll make a high C or a B in 7th grade, but why not give it a year and give her more prep? Go for the A in 8th grade?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good read. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/when-are-students-ready-for-algebra/?hl=en-US#:~:text=And%20students%20who%20complete%20Algebra,negative%20consequences%20on%20their%20achievement.

"Students needed to score around a 235 to 238 on MAP Growth in the spring of seventh grade to be on track to score proficient at the end of an Algebra 1 course. "

A 50% chance of being only proficient? I assume proficient in this case means passing, not outright mastery. Sounds like a low bar.

This was an eye-opener. The author of the article said that of the kids with a 235-238 on the MAP, 50% of those kids could probably handle it, and 50% could struggle with it. He said it would be understandable for a school district to raise the bar and require more preparation and proficiency for Algebra I. Mine has a 245 on MAP in the 6th, and I don't think she's ready to take a high school course that will go on her transcript. Sure, maybe she'll make a high C or a B in 7th grade, but why not give it a year and give her more prep? Go for the A in 8th grade?

You do what's appropriate for your kid, even hold back one additional year and go for Alg1 in 9th grade, if that ensures an A on the transcript. FCPS has already been accommodating the needs of students like yours, but ignoring the needs of advanced students, until now.

Of the approximate 14000 FCPS 6th graders, 700 advanced kids' needs are being met by Alg1 program. Why and how does a program meeting the needs of 5% of total 6th grade kids concern you?

[Anonymous]

I would only have my DC, the high school level course if DC can get A or A-.

Rising 7th graders will have Algeba 1 and Language/ Spanish1, two high school level courses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good read. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/when-are-students-ready-for-algebra/?hl=en-US#:~:text=And%20students%20who%20complete%20Algebra,negative%20consequences%20on%20their%20achievement.

"Students needed to score around a 235 to 238 on MAP Growth in the spring of seventh grade to be on track to score proficient at the end of an Algebra 1 course. "

A 50% chance of being only proficient? I assume proficient in this case means passing, not outright mastery. Sounds like a low bar.

This was an eye-opener. The author of the article said that of the kids with a 235-238 on the MAP, 50% of those kids could probably handle it, and 50% could struggle with it. He said it would be understandable for a school district to raise the bar and require more preparation and proficiency for Algebra I. Mine has a 245 on MAP in the 6th, and I don't think she's ready to take a high school course that will go on her transcript. Sure, maybe she'll make a high C or a B in 7th grade, but why not give it a year and give her more prep? Go for the A in 8th grade?

You do what's appropriate for your kid, even hold back one additional year and go for Alg1 in 9th grade, if that ensures an A on the transcript. FCPS has already been accommodating the needs of students like yours, but ignoring the needs of advanced students, until now.

Of the approximate 14000 FCPS 6th graders, 700 advanced kids' needs are being met by Alg1 program. Why and how does a program meeting the needs of 5% of total 6th grade kids concern you?

I have zero problems with this accelerated math program. Maybe you should go back and read the whole thread. I have a problem with FCPS requiring me to opt out instead of opt in. I have a problem with FCPS not providing transparency in the decision-making process behind this. I'm not writing for you. I'm writing for all the other parents out there with kids like mine. There are parents who think FCPS has done their due diligence in research and trust that their kid will succeed in Alg1H in 6th or 7th grade with a certain MAP score. The research is more nuanced than that. Mine won't be happy with a C on her transcript, even though statistically that grade could be considered average or "proficient." I was surprised when she came home and said every kid in her AAP class was taking AlgI next year. I hope they are ok with the B's and C's. But we all know how AAP parents are....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good read. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/when-are-students-ready-for-algebra/?hl=en-US#:~:text=And%20students%20who%20complete%20Algebra,negative%20consequences%20on%20their%20achievement.

"Students needed to score around a 235 to 238 on MAP Growth in the spring of seventh grade to be on track to score proficient at the end of an Algebra 1 course. "

A 50% chance of being only proficient? I assume proficient in this case means passing, not outright mastery. Sounds like a low bar.

This was an eye-opener. The author of the article said that of the kids with a 235-238 on the MAP, 50% of those kids could probably handle it, and 50% could struggle with it. He said it would be understandable for a school district to raise the bar and require more preparation and proficiency for Algebra I. Mine has a 245 on MAP in the 6th, and I don't think she's ready to take a high school course that will go on her transcript. Sure, maybe she'll make a high C or a B in 7th grade, but why not give it a year and give her more prep? Go for the A in 8th grade?

You do what's appropriate for your kid, even hold back one additional year and go for Alg1 in 9th grade, if that ensures an A on the transcript. FCPS has already been accommodating the needs of students like yours, but ignoring the needs of advanced students, until now.

Of the approximate 14000 FCPS 6th graders, 700 advanced kids' needs are being met by Alg1 program. Why and how does a program meeting the needs of 5% of total 6th grade kids concern you?

DP. You should be concerned about the way Alg 1 is being implemented. If they let any kids, whether ready or not, enroll in the class, then the teacher is going to slow down the class and water down the content to meet the majority of the kids where they are. While it would be nice to imagine that the teacher will maintain standards and let kids earn poor grades or drop down, the reality is that doing so is a huge administrative hassle for the teacher. If the class is filled only with kids who truly are ready, then both the kids who weren't ready and won't have to struggle in a class that is too hard for them and the kids who were ready and won't have to deal with a dumbed-down class will benefit.

FWIW, I think it's great that they're expanding access to Alg. I in 6th, but they should be using a higher threshold for entry. If they don't want to gatekeep the class, then they should provide more detailed information to parents to allow the parents to make a truly informed decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good read. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/when-are-students-ready-for-algebra/?hl=en-US#:~:text=And%20students%20who%20complete%20Algebra,negative%20consequences%20on%20their%20achievement.

"Students needed to score around a 235 to 238 on MAP Growth in the spring of seventh grade to be on track to score proficient at the end of an Algebra 1 course. "

A 50% chance of being only proficient? I assume proficient in this case means passing, not outright mastery. Sounds like a low bar.

This was an eye-opener. The author of the article said that of the kids with a 235-238 on the MAP, 50% of those kids could probably handle it, and 50% could struggle with it. He said it would be understandable for a school district to raise the bar and require more preparation and proficiency for Algebra I. Mine has a 245 on MAP in the 6th, and I don't think she's ready to take a high school course that will go on her transcript. Sure, maybe she'll make a high C or a B in 7th grade, but why not give it a year and give her more prep? Go for the A in 8th grade?

You do what's appropriate for your kid, even hold back one additional year and go for Alg1 in 9th grade, if that ensures an A on the transcript. FCPS has already been accommodating the needs of students like yours, but ignoring the needs of advanced students, until now.

Of the approximate 14000 FCPS 6th graders, 700 advanced kids' needs are being met by Alg1 program. Why and how does a program meeting the needs of 5% of total 6th grade kids concern you?

DP. You should be concerned about the way Alg 1 is being implemented. If they let any kids, whether ready or not, enroll in the class, then the teacher is going to slow down the class and water down the content to meet the majority of the kids where they are. While it would be nice to imagine that the teacher will maintain standards and let kids earn poor grades or drop down, the reality is that doing so is a huge administrative hassle for the teacher. If the class is filled only with kids who truly are ready, then both the kids who weren't ready and won't have to struggle in a class that is too hard for them and the kids who were ready and won't have to deal with a dumbed-down class will benefit.

FWIW, I think it's great that they're expanding access to Alg. I in 6th, but they should be using a higher threshold for entry. If they don't want to gatekeep the class, then they should provide more detailed information to parents to allow the parents to make a truly informed decision.

This is a good point. Honestly, I haven't talked to one teacher who thinks this is a good idea. Why does no one listen to teachers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good read. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/when-are-students-ready-for-algebra/?hl=en-US#:~:text=And%20students%20who%20complete%20Algebra,negative%20consequences%20on%20their%20achievement.

"Students needed to score around a 235 to 238 on MAP Growth in the spring of seventh grade to be on track to score proficient at the end of an Algebra 1 course. "

A 50% chance of being only proficient? I assume proficient in this case means passing, not outright mastery. Sounds like a low bar.

This was an eye-opener. The author of the article said that of the kids with a 235-238 on the MAP, 50% of those kids could probably handle it, and 50% could struggle with it. He said it would be understandable for a school district to raise the bar and require more preparation and proficiency for Algebra I. Mine has a 245 on MAP in the 6th, and I don't think she's ready to take a high school course that will go on her transcript. Sure, maybe she'll make a high C or a B in 7th grade, but why not give it a year and give her more prep? Go for the A in 8th grade?

You do what's appropriate for your kid, even hold back one additional year and go for Alg1 in 9th grade, if that ensures an A on the transcript. FCPS has already been accommodating the needs of students like yours, but ignoring the needs of advanced students, until now.

Of the approximate 14000 FCPS 6th graders, 700 advanced kids' needs are being met by Alg1 program. Why and how does a program meeting the needs of 5% of total 6th grade kids concern you?

DP. You should be concerned about the way Alg 1 is being implemented. If they let any kids, whether ready or not, enroll in the class, then the teacher is going to slow down the class and water down the content to meet the majority of the kids where they are. While it would be nice to imagine that the teacher will maintain standards and let kids earn poor grades or drop down, the reality is that doing so is a huge administrative hassle for the teacher. If the class is filled only with kids who truly are ready, then both the kids who weren't ready and won't have to struggle in a class that is too hard for them and the kids who were ready and won't have to deal with a dumbed-down class will benefit.

FWIW, I think it's great that they're expanding access to Alg. I in 6th, but they should be using a higher threshold for entry. If they don't want to gatekeep the class, then they should provide more detailed information to parents to allow the parents to make a truly informed decision.

This is a good point. Honestly, I haven't talked to one teacher who thinks this is a good idea. Why does no one listen to teachers?

So you went around and talked to all alg1 teachers of all 700 students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good read. https://www.nwea.org/blog/2024/when-are-students-ready-for-algebra/?hl=en-US#:~:text=And%20students%20who%20complete%20Algebra,negative%20consequences%20on%20their%20achievement.

"Students needed to score around a 235 to 238 on MAP Growth in the spring of seventh grade to be on track to score proficient at the end of an Algebra 1 course. "

A 50% chance of being only proficient? I assume proficient in this case means passing, not outright mastery. Sounds like a low bar.

This was an eye-opener. The author of the article said that of the kids with a 235-238 on the MAP, 50% of those kids could probably handle it, and 50% could struggle with it. He said it would be understandable for a school district to raise the bar and require more preparation and proficiency for Algebra I. Mine has a 245 on MAP in the 6th, and I don't think she's ready to take a high school course that will go on her transcript. Sure, maybe she'll make a high C or a B in 7th grade, but why not give it a year and give her more prep? Go for the A in 8th grade?

You do what's appropriate for your kid, even hold back one additional year and go for Alg1 in 9th grade, if that ensures an A on the transcript. FCPS has already been accommodating the needs of students like yours, but ignoring the needs of advanced students, until now.

Of the approximate 14000 FCPS 6th graders, 700 advanced kids' needs are being met by Alg1 program. Why and how does a program meeting the needs of 5% of total 6th grade kids concern you?

DP. You should be concerned about the way Alg 1 is being implemented. If they let any kids, whether ready or not, enroll in the class, then the teacher is going to slow down the class and water down the content to meet the majority of the kids where they are. While it would be nice to imagine that the teacher will maintain standards and let kids earn poor grades or drop down, the reality is that doing so is a huge administrative hassle for the teacher. If the class is filled only with kids who truly are ready, then both the kids who weren't ready and won't have to struggle in a class that is too hard for them and the kids who were ready and won't have to deal with a dumbed-down class will benefit.

FWIW, I think it's great that they're expanding access to Alg. I in 6th, but they should be using a higher threshold for entry. If they don't want to gatekeep the class, then they should provide more detailed information to parents to allow the parents to make a truly informed decision.

This argument doesn't make sense, that only the 6th grade alg1 class has students of mixed abilities, and not in any other 7th, 8th, or 9th grade alg1 classes. If anything, any dumbing down is more likely happening in those upper grades.