Is FCPS ending advance math for students who are not in AAP?

[Anonymous]

I'm really glad DS2 is already in 7th and we escaped all this craziness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a drama llama.

I work in a E3 school. The kids who need it will get advanced math in 5th and take the 6th grade SOL like normal.

If anything, according to our Math Coach, we are on track for MORE kids to take advanced math based on last year's SOL performance and i-ready performance.

I teach 5th grade (and also teach advanced math).

So they aren’t taking acceleration away. 👍

We're at an E3 pilot (our student is in 5th this year) and the sad truth is that E3 did not prepare him or his fellow students for 5th grade accelerated math. They are having a lot of trouble getting them up to speed for the 6th grade SOL. So while I'm not opposed at all to doing away with tracking in 3rd and 4th (which E3 does), then they need to have a better plan for these E3 kids in 5th grade, because right now none of them are where they should be to take Algebra in 8th. They have to skip ahead somewhere or else they have to continue the compacted/accelerated E3 curriculum for all through 5th-7th too. Right now, this pilot just takes away the skills they would have learned in advanced math in 3rd and 4th and assumes the "advance math" kids will be fine to do 6th grade math as 5th graders. It's not working.

Well there is a good graphic that describes this. See there are some people watching a baseball game and they all have boxes but one guy doesn't have sufficient boxes to see over the fence, so they take one box from the tall guy who can already see over the fence and give it to this other guy so he can see the baseball game too.

This right here is when the teacher takes away acceleration and gives more attention to another group of students, so they can see the baseball game. Now everyone can see the Algebra 1 in 8th grade. If you want to sit closer, your privilege can be used but it will not be supported by the school. I think there is picture for this somewhere.

But my point was that E3 math is NOT preparing kids for Algebra 1 in 8th grade. The current FCPS standard track is Math 8, which is pre-algebra, and Algebra 1 in 9th grade. If they want to have Algebra 1 honors in 8th grade then they have to skip somewhere. E3 takes the skip away from 3rd and 4th grade. So where will the jump happen?

There is SO much repetition in math from 3rd - pre Algebra. The smart kids don't need all that repetition. If a kid is struggling with the 6th grade SOL in 5th, they aren't really an advanced math kid. The standards really aren't that different between the two grades, and the "mathy" kids will easily do fine on the standard 6th grade material.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is OP. What’s E3

Previously known as “Equity Cubed.”

Essentially they eliminate advanced and accelerated math opportunities for the students who are capable of learning at a faster pace.

E3 is a prime example of “closing the racial achievement gap from the top down.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a drama llama.

I work in a E3 school. The kids who need it will get advanced math in 5th and take the 6th grade SOL like normal.

If anything, according to our Math Coach, we are on track for MORE kids to take advanced math based on last year's SOL performance and i-ready performance.

I teach 5th grade (and also teach advanced math).

So they aren’t taking acceleration away. 👍

We're at an E3 pilot (our student is in 5th this year) and the sad truth is that E3 did not prepare him or his fellow students for 5th grade accelerated math. They are having a lot of trouble getting them up to speed for the 6th grade SOL. So while I'm not opposed at all to doing away with tracking in 3rd and 4th (which E3 does), then they need to have a better plan for these E3 kids in 5th grade, because right now none of them are where they should be to take Algebra in 8th. They have to skip ahead somewhere or else they have to continue the compacted/accelerated E3 curriculum for all through 5th-7th too. Right now, this pilot just takes away the skills they would have learned in advanced math in 3rd and 4th and assumes the "advance math" kids will be fine to do 6th grade math as 5th graders. It's not working.

Well there is a good graphic that describes this. See there are some people watching a baseball game and they all have boxes but one guy doesn't have sufficient boxes to see over the fence, so they take one box from the tall guy who can already see over the fence and give it to this other guy so he can see the baseball game too.

This right here is when the teacher takes away acceleration and gives more attention to another group of students, so they can see the baseball game. Now everyone can see the Algebra 1 in 8th grade. If you want to sit closer, your privilege can be used but it will not be supported by the school. I think there is picture for this somewhere.

But my point was that E3 math is NOT preparing kids for Algebra 1 in 8th grade. The current FCPS standard track is Math 8, which is pre-algebra, and Algebra 1 in 9th grade. If they want to have Algebra 1 honors in 8th grade then they have to skip somewhere. E3 takes the skip away from 3rd and 4th grade. So where will the jump happen?

There is SO much repetition in math from 3rd - pre Algebra. The smart kids don't need all that repetition. If a kid is struggling with the 6th grade SOL in 5th, they aren't really an advanced math kid. The standards really aren't that different between the two grades, and the "mathy" kids will easily do fine on the standard 6th grade material.

That's easy for you to say if you haven't experienced E3 math. We are actually in the pilot and I'm telling you, NONE of the 4th graders would have qualified for advanced math in 5th grade based on what they learned in E3. So the school just left them "advanced" anyway and is trying to catch them up. So apparently they didn't even really learn the 4th grade standards with E3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was the year 2000. But that just proves my point. Many ideas and reforms aren't novel new ideas, they are updates/reboots/refined versions of older ideas. So flexible groupings were the status quo in the 80's to 90's, the pendulum moved away from that. We then saw things like balanced literacy and "new" math. Things seem to move further left with the equity focus, etc. Are we starting to go back towards the center?

So last century.

Flexible groupings are far more equitable than AAP.

PP. Yes, I agree with you. It worked when I was a kid, things started to change when I was in college and hopefully things will swing back that direction. I like the very small GT for those who really need it.

DP. Agreed. I'm the poster who grew up in FCPS when there was a tiny GT program. No one resented those students because it was clear they were ACTUALLY gifted and needed a separate program. Everyone else was put into flexible groups depending on their level, and no one was locked into any one group. Students can improve and move up, or receive remediation, depending on their abilities in each core subject. That was the way to go.

I was also in that tiny GT program and I teach for FCPS right now. The dynamics of the current classroom wouldn’t support that type of program anymore. There are kids, in one classroom, at seven different math and reading levels. To be able to put students in the groups that they “should” be in is essentially illegal nowadays.

Have you read the entire thread? This isn't at all what is being discussed here. It's been repeated, over and over, that what FCPS needs are flexible groupings *among the entire grade level team*. So Teacher A would take all the advanced math kids, Teacher B would take the grade-level kids, Teacher C would take the remedial group. And so on for all four core subjects. No one is talking about dividing up each individual classroom into multiple levels.

And if flexible grouping is "essentially illegal" nowadays (??), then assigning 7 yr. olds to either AAP or GE should absolutely be illegal.

This is clearly written by someone who knows nothing about teaching/education. Why don’t you go to the national Department of Education website and do a little research on ability tracking. Once you’ve read up on that, then you’ll realize why FCPS specifically pushes more minorities into AAP.

Doesn't work though

I am new to the forum. Why does FCPS specifically push more minorities into AAP? Thanks.

FCPS is an academic system; ie - a school system.

FCPS has repeatedly stressed academics are not their first priority.

Equity is the FCPS school board and superintendent’s first priority. They stress this over and over.

Citation?

https://wpde.com/amp/news/nation-world/marginalization-is-driving-force-for-resource-allocation-in-virginia-school-district-fairfax-county-public-schools-equity-policy-thomas-jefferson-high-school-national-merit-recognition


Google the rest yourself.

They are pushing for MORE kids to finish Alg 1 by 8th. They are promoting acceleration.

And also removing acceleration for others aiming for Algebra in 7th. Equity.

California attempted a similar approach to “equity math.” It was a monumental disaster, both in failing to achieve equity but also in failing to educate the most capable students:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/california-math-framework-algebra/675509/

Fairfax county’s school board and the superintendent are leading FCPS down a path to disaster.

They were also pushing more kids to take Alg 1 in 8th?

DP Heterogenous classes

How is that relevant to what FCPS is doing? FCPS is pushing to have MORE kids take Alg 1 in 8th, not eliminating it.

With E3, FCPS is making Grade 3 and Grade 4 math classes heterogenous; they are no longer offering separate advanced and regular math classes. CA also emphasized heterogenous classes. When you put a wide range of kids in one class, it makes it hard for teachers. They are not going to be able to successfully differentiate for everyone's needs, meaning they'll target instruction to the middle, shortchanging kids at either end. When they tried this in San Francisco, it widened the achievement gap, with kids at the lowest end of the spectrum hit the hardest. That is why some posters are questioning whether kids will be prepared for 8th grade Algebra in practice, if the method used to get there is E3's heterogenous math class approach.

They did many other changes in SF. Not comparable.

But heterogenous classes were one of biggest changes in San Francisco. And now FCPS is beginning down that path as well.

Big scary heterogenous classes in early elementary! How will you sleep at night?

Presently, FCPS is implementing heterogenous classes in third and fourth grade. The question remains as to whether FCPS will ultimately extend E3 (& its heterogenous classes) to 5th & 6th grade as well.

E3 leaves the kids who will proceed to advanced math less prepared than the kids who have been taking advanced math since third. Currently advanced math students push a little a head every year so that 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th grade math are all compressed between 3rd and 5th followed by 7th grade math in 6th. The program works well for those who are in it (as reflected by SOL scores) and prepares them to either take Algebra or 8th grade math (confusingly named honors math 7) in 7th grade. E3 means that the kids moving to advanced math in 5th now have to do all of 5th, 6th, and 7th grade in two years. I'd guess that they know students will do worse (which will be reflected in SOL scores) and it will be used as an excuse to curtail advanced math in general in favor of preparing all kids for Algebra in 8th.

Advanced Math did not start in 3rd at every school before E3 existed. DS’s school said they had Advanced Math starting in third but the Teachers explained that the class was one large class with the Advanced Math skills taught to everyone. The only kids who were technically graded on the Advanced Math concepts were the kids identified for Advanced Math, There was not a separate group math group or class. They said this would allow more kids to move into the Advanced Math class in 5th grade, which was it’s own group of kids.

DS is in 6th grade this year. I believe 4 kids in the Advanced Math group passed Advanced on the SOL last year. I have no clue if there will be a higher number this year. Parents at the school have said tha most of the kids in Advanced Math ended up taking Algebra 1 honors in 7th grade but I am doubting that will be the case next year because I have a hard time believing that they will jump from 4 to 12 or more passing Advanced on the SOL, and that is ignoring the IAAT.

No clue if this is COVID hangover, his group had online learning in 3rd grade and the math instruction was horrible. It is why we started RSM because there was no math learning going on in 3rd. It was embarrassingly bad. Oh so bad. I don’t blame the Teacher, teaching online when you have never done so before is hard and teaching math to 5 different math levels online at one time has to be horrible. We supplemented and are happy that we did so.

Your school is proof that it doesn't work. Our non-center school has 100% pass rates for the advanced math students most years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is OP. What’s E3

Previously known as “Equity Cubed.”

Essentially they eliminate advanced and accelerated math opportunities for the students who are capable of learning at a faster pace.

E3 is a prime example of “closing the racial achievement gap from the top down.”

E3 was never called Equity Cubed - at least not officially? I'm as skeptical about it as anyone, but the official name is "Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics (E3) Network." According to the woman who piloted it the point was that the VA math standards are too easy for most kids (I think most people can agree on this), so we should extend or enhance them.

What they never would give me a straight answer on was whether E3 kept as much acceleration as advanced math. And repeatedly it's been shown that it doesn't. If they did E3 for gen ed, or at least most gen ed, and advanced math for the advanced math kids (level IV and anyone who meets the criteria by school), I doubt anyone would complain. E3 would be basic on grade standards plus and advanced math would stay as-is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was the year 2000. But that just proves my point. Many ideas and reforms aren't novel new ideas, they are updates/reboots/refined versions of older ideas. So flexible groupings were the status quo in the 80's to 90's, the pendulum moved away from that. We then saw things like balanced literacy and "new" math. Things seem to move further left with the equity focus, etc. Are we starting to go back towards the center?

So last century.

Flexible groupings are far more equitable than AAP.

PP. Yes, I agree with you. It worked when I was a kid, things started to change when I was in college and hopefully things will swing back that direction. I like the very small GT for those who really need it.

DP. Agreed. I'm the poster who grew up in FCPS when there was a tiny GT program. No one resented those students because it was clear they were ACTUALLY gifted and needed a separate program. Everyone else was put into flexible groups depending on their level, and no one was locked into any one group. Students can improve and move up, or receive remediation, depending on their abilities in each core subject. That was the way to go.

I was also in that tiny GT program and I teach for FCPS right now. The dynamics of the current classroom wouldn’t support that type of program anymore. There are kids, in one classroom, at seven different math and reading levels. To be able to put students in the groups that they “should” be in is essentially illegal nowadays.

Have you read the entire thread? This isn't at all what is being discussed here. It's been repeated, over and over, that what FCPS needs are flexible groupings *among the entire grade level team*. So Teacher A would take all the advanced math kids, Teacher B would take the grade-level kids, Teacher C would take the remedial group. And so on for all four core subjects. No one is talking about dividing up each individual classroom into multiple levels.

And if flexible grouping is "essentially illegal" nowadays (??), then assigning 7 yr. olds to either AAP or GE should absolutely be illegal.

This is clearly written by someone who knows nothing about teaching/education. Why don’t you go to the national Department of Education website and do a little research on ability tracking. Once you’ve read up on that, then you’ll realize why FCPS specifically pushes more minorities into AAP.

Doesn't work though

I am new to the forum. Why does FCPS specifically push more minorities into AAP? Thanks.

FCPS is an academic system; ie - a school system.

FCPS has repeatedly stressed academics are not their first priority.

Equity is the FCPS school board and superintendent’s first priority. They stress this over and over.

Citation?

https://wpde.com/amp/news/nation-world/marginalization-is-driving-force-for-resource-allocation-in-virginia-school-district-fairfax-county-public-schools-equity-policy-thomas-jefferson-high-school-national-merit-recognition


Google the rest yourself.

They are pushing for MORE kids to finish Alg 1 by 8th. They are promoting acceleration.

And also removing acceleration for others aiming for Algebra in 7th. Equity.

California attempted a similar approach to “equity math.” It was a monumental disaster, both in failing to achieve equity but also in failing to educate the most capable students:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/california-math-framework-algebra/675509/

Fairfax county’s school board and the superintendent are leading FCPS down a path to disaster.

They were also pushing more kids to take Alg 1 in 8th?

DP Heterogenous classes

How is that relevant to what FCPS is doing? FCPS is pushing to have MORE kids take Alg 1 in 8th, not eliminating it.

With E3, FCPS is making Grade 3 and Grade 4 math classes heterogenous; they are no longer offering separate advanced and regular math classes. CA also emphasized heterogenous classes. When you put a wide range of kids in one class, it makes it hard for teachers. They are not going to be able to successfully differentiate for everyone's needs, meaning they'll target instruction to the middle, shortchanging kids at either end. When they tried this in San Francisco, it widened the achievement gap, with kids at the lowest end of the spectrum hit the hardest. That is why some posters are questioning whether kids will be prepared for 8th grade Algebra in practice, if the method used to get there is E3's heterogenous math class approach.

They did many other changes in SF. Not comparable.

But heterogenous classes were one of biggest changes in San Francisco. And now FCPS is beginning down that path as well.

Big scary heterogenous classes in early elementary! How will you sleep at night?

Presently, FCPS is implementing heterogenous classes in third and fourth grade. The question remains as to whether FCPS will ultimately extend E3 (& its heterogenous classes) to 5th & 6th grade as well.

E3 leaves the kids who will proceed to advanced math less prepared than the kids who have been taking advanced math since third. Currently advanced math students push a little a head every year so that 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th grade math are all compressed between 3rd and 5th followed by 7th grade math in 6th. The program works well for those who are in it (as reflected by SOL scores) and prepares them to either take Algebra or 8th grade math (confusingly named honors math 7) in 7th grade. E3 means that the kids moving to advanced math in 5th now have to do all of 5th, 6th, and 7th grade in two years. I'd guess that they know students will do worse (which will be reflected in SOL scores) and it will be used as an excuse to curtail advanced math in general in favor of preparing all kids for Algebra in 8th.

Advanced Math did not start in 3rd at every school before E3 existed. DS’s school said they had Advanced Math starting in third but the Teachers explained that the class was one large class with the Advanced Math skills taught to everyone. The only kids who were technically graded on the Advanced Math concepts were the kids identified for Advanced Math, There was not a separate group math group or class. They said this would allow more kids to move into the Advanced Math class in 5th grade, which was it’s own group of kids.

DS is in 6th grade this year. I believe 4 kids in the Advanced Math group passed Advanced on the SOL last year. I have no clue if there will be a higher number this year. Parents at the school have said tha most of the kids in Advanced Math ended up taking Algebra 1 honors in 7th grade but I am doubting that will be the case next year because I have a hard time believing that they will jump from 4 to 12 or more passing Advanced on the SOL, and that is ignoring the IAAT.

No clue if this is COVID hangover, his group had online learning in 3rd grade and the math instruction was horrible. It is why we started RSM because there was no math learning going on in 3rd. It was embarrassingly bad. Oh so bad. I don’t blame the Teacher, teaching online when you have never done so before is hard and teaching math to 5 different math levels online at one time has to be horrible. We supplemented and are happy that we did so.

Your school is proof that it doesn't work. Our non-center school has 100% pass rates for the advanced math students most years.

PP said “pass advanced” which is different than just “pass”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is OP. What’s E3

Previously known as “Equity Cubed.”

Essentially they eliminate advanced and accelerated math opportunities for the students who are capable of learning at a faster pace.

E3 is a prime example of “closing the racial achievement gap from the top down.”

E3 was never called Equity Cubed - at least not officially? I'm as skeptical about it as anyone, but the official name is "Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics (E3) Network." According to the woman who piloted it the point was that the VA math standards are too easy for most kids (I think most people can agree on this), so we should extend or enhance them.

What they never would give me a straight answer on was whether E3 kept as much acceleration as advanced math. And repeatedly it's been shown that it doesn't. If they did E3 for gen ed, or at least most gen ed, and advanced math for the advanced math kids (level IV and anyone who meets the criteria by school), I doubt anyone would complain. E3 would be basic on grade standards plus and advanced math would stay as-is.

It is E^3 (cubed) - Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics.

Which is different than E3 Alliance (Education Equals Economics).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is OP. What’s E3

Previously known as “Equity Cubed.”

Essentially they eliminate advanced and accelerated math opportunities for the students who are capable of learning at a faster pace.

E3 is a prime example of “closing the racial achievement gap from the top down.”

E3 was never called Equity Cubed - at least not officially? I'm as skeptical about it as anyone, but the official name is "Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics (E3) Network." According to the woman who piloted it the point was that the VA math standards are too easy for most kids (I think most people can agree on this), so we should extend or enhance them.

What they never would give me a straight answer on was whether E3 kept as much acceleration as advanced math. And repeatedly it's been shown that it doesn't. If they did E3 for gen ed, or at least most gen ed, and advanced math for the advanced math kids (level IV and anyone who meets the criteria by school), I doubt anyone would complain. E3 would be basic on grade standards plus and advanced math would stay as-is.

It is E^3 (cubed) - Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics.

Which is different than E3 Alliance (Education Equals Economics).

And yet FCPS E3 and E3 Alliance share similar objectives: increase the share of students taking Algebra 1 in 8th grade by delaying the jumping off point for acceleration to allow late bloomers to catch up. (E3 Alliance argues for waiting until 6th grade to accelerate students.) E3 Alliance partners with UT Austin and the Dana Center; the latter group led efforts to reform state math programs, including VMPI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is OP. What’s E3

Previously known as “Equity Cubed.”

Essentially they eliminate advanced and accelerated math opportunities for the students who are capable of learning at a faster pace.

E3 is a prime example of “closing the racial achievement gap from the top down.”

E3 was never called Equity Cubed - at least not officially? I'm as skeptical about it as anyone, but the official name is "Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics (E3) Network." According to the woman who piloted it the point was that the VA math standards are too easy for most kids (I think most people can agree on this), so we should extend or enhance them.

What they never would give me a straight answer on was whether E3 kept as much acceleration as advanced math. And repeatedly it's been shown that it doesn't. If they did E3 for gen ed, or at least most gen ed, and advanced math for the advanced math kids (level IV and anyone who meets the criteria by school), I doubt anyone would complain. E3 would be basic on grade standards plus and advanced math would stay as-is.

It is E^3 (cubed) - Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics.

Which is different than E3 Alliance (Education Equals Economics).

And yet FCPS E3 and E3 Alliance share similar objectives: increase the share of students taking Algebra 1 in 8th grade by delaying the jumping off point for acceleration to allow late bloomers to catch up. (E3 Alliance argues for waiting until 6th grade to accelerate students.) E3 Alliance partners with UT Austin and the Dana Center; the latter group led efforts to reform state math programs, including VMPI.

And yet they are not the same.

E3 != E^3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was the year 2000. But that just proves my point. Many ideas and reforms aren't novel new ideas, they are updates/reboots/refined versions of older ideas. So flexible groupings were the status quo in the 80's to 90's, the pendulum moved away from that. We then saw things like balanced literacy and "new" math. Things seem to move further left with the equity focus, etc. Are we starting to go back towards the center?

So last century.

Flexible groupings are far more equitable than AAP.

PP. Yes, I agree with you. It worked when I was a kid, things started to change when I was in college and hopefully things will swing back that direction. I like the very small GT for those who really need it.

DP. Agreed. I'm the poster who grew up in FCPS when there was a tiny GT program. No one resented those students because it was clear they were ACTUALLY gifted and needed a separate program. Everyone else was put into flexible groups depending on their level, and no one was locked into any one group. Students can improve and move up, or receive remediation, depending on their abilities in each core subject. That was the way to go.

I was also in that tiny GT program and I teach for FCPS right now. The dynamics of the current classroom wouldn’t support that type of program anymore. There are kids, in one classroom, at seven different math and reading levels. To be able to put students in the groups that they “should” be in is essentially illegal nowadays.

Have you read the entire thread? This isn't at all what is being discussed here. It's been repeated, over and over, that what FCPS needs are flexible groupings *among the entire grade level team*. So Teacher A would take all the advanced math kids, Teacher B would take the grade-level kids, Teacher C would take the remedial group. And so on for all four core subjects. No one is talking about dividing up each individual classroom into multiple levels.

And if flexible grouping is "essentially illegal" nowadays (??), then assigning 7 yr. olds to either AAP or GE should absolutely be illegal.

This is clearly written by someone who knows nothing about teaching/education. Why don’t you go to the national Department of Education website and do a little research on ability tracking. Once you’ve read up on that, then you’ll realize why FCPS specifically pushes more minorities into AAP.

Doesn't work though

I am new to the forum. Why does FCPS specifically push more minorities into AAP? Thanks.

FCPS is an academic system; ie - a school system.

FCPS has repeatedly stressed academics are not their first priority.

Equity is the FCPS school board and superintendent’s first priority. They stress this over and over.

Citation?

https://wpde.com/amp/news/nation-world/marginalization-is-driving-force-for-resource-allocation-in-virginia-school-district-fairfax-county-public-schools-equity-policy-thomas-jefferson-high-school-national-merit-recognition


Google the rest yourself.

They are pushing for MORE kids to finish Alg 1 by 8th. They are promoting acceleration.

And also removing acceleration for others aiming for Algebra in 7th. Equity.

California attempted a similar approach to “equity math.” It was a monumental disaster, both in failing to achieve equity but also in failing to educate the most capable students:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/california-math-framework-algebra/675509/

Fairfax county’s school board and the superintendent are leading FCPS down a path to disaster.

They were also pushing more kids to take Alg 1 in 8th?

DP Heterogenous classes

How is that relevant to what FCPS is doing? FCPS is pushing to have MORE kids take Alg 1 in 8th, not eliminating it.

Exactly. They are doing this while simultaneously pushing to have LESS kids take Alg 1 in 7th. Equity.

While I agree equity drives almost every decision in FCPS today the issue is not whether kids take Algebra 1 in 7th or 8th grade. They should be learning basic algebraic concepts in 4th, 5th and 6th grade. Integrated math is what countries that teach math well in other parts of the world do. Not the chapter book method, Algebra 1, Geometry, Algebra 2, Trig/PreCalc, Calculus that we teach in the US.

Your course list would be a slowdown in curriculum for advanced students; their progression is Algebra 1, Geometry, Algebra 2/Trig, Precalc, Calculus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is OP. What’s E3

Previously known as “Equity Cubed.”

Essentially they eliminate advanced and accelerated math opportunities for the students who are capable of learning at a faster pace.

E3 is a prime example of “closing the racial achievement gap from the top down.”

E3 was never called Equity Cubed - at least not officially? I'm as skeptical about it as anyone, but the official name is "Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics (E3) Network." According to the woman who piloted it the point was that the VA math standards are too easy for most kids (I think most people can agree on this), so we should extend or enhance them.

What they never would give me a straight answer on was whether E3 kept as much acceleration as advanced math. And repeatedly it's been shown that it doesn't. If they did E3 for gen ed, or at least most gen ed, and advanced math for the advanced math kids (level IV and anyone who meets the criteria by school), I doubt anyone would complain. E3 would be basic on grade standards plus and advanced math would stay as-is.

It is E^3 (cubed) - Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics.

Which is different than E3 Alliance (Education Equals Economics).

And yet FCPS E3 and E3 Alliance share similar objectives: increase the share of students taking Algebra 1 in 8th grade by delaying the jumping off point for acceleration to allow late bloomers to catch up. (E3 Alliance argues for waiting until 6th grade to accelerate students.) E3 Alliance partners with UT Austin and the Dana Center; the latter group led efforts to reform state math programs, including VMPI.

And yet they are not the same.

E3 != E^3

You left off a word. FCPS refers to it as E3 Network.

E3 Alliance uses the same word "network" to describe an effort to connect groups across the US who want education reform:
"In this effort, E3 Alliance is not alone. They are a part of a national network of nearly 70 communities across the United States, who are using and sharing best practices to provide better education outcomes." https://e3alliance.org/2023/04/04/e3-alliance-earns-strivetogether-systems-transformation-designation/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is OP. What’s E3

Previously known as “Equity Cubed.”

Essentially they eliminate advanced and accelerated math opportunities for the students who are capable of learning at a faster pace.

E3 is a prime example of “closing the racial achievement gap from the top down.”

E3 was never called Equity Cubed - at least not officially? I'm as skeptical about it as anyone, but the official name is "Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics (E3) Network." According to the woman who piloted it the point was that the VA math standards are too easy for most kids (I think most people can agree on this), so we should extend or enhance them.

What they never would give me a straight answer on was whether E3 kept as much acceleration as advanced math. And repeatedly it's been shown that it doesn't. If they did E3 for gen ed, or at least most gen ed, and advanced math for the advanced math kids (level IV and anyone who meets the criteria by school), I doubt anyone would complain. E3 would be basic on grade standards plus and advanced math would stay as-is.

It is E^3 (cubed) - Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics.

Which is different than E3 Alliance (Education Equals Economics).

And yet FCPS E3 and E3 Alliance share similar objectives: increase the share of students taking Algebra 1 in 8th grade by delaying the jumping off point for acceleration to allow late bloomers to catch up. (E3 Alliance argues for waiting until 6th grade to accelerate students.) E3 Alliance partners with UT Austin and the Dana Center; the latter group led efforts to reform state math programs, including VMPI.

Wow did not know. I mean when our e3 school started using the words ‘pathways’ and ‘deeper’ about e3 I knew it was VMPI by another name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is OP. What’s E3

Previously known as “Equity Cubed.”

Essentially they eliminate advanced and accelerated math opportunities for the students who are capable of learning at a faster pace.

E3 is a prime example of “closing the racial achievement gap from the top down.”

E3 was never called Equity Cubed - at least not officially? I'm as skeptical about it as anyone, but the official name is "Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics (E3) Network." According to the woman who piloted it the point was that the VA math standards are too easy for most kids (I think most people can agree on this), so we should extend or enhance them.

What they never would give me a straight answer on was whether E3 kept as much acceleration as advanced math. And repeatedly it's been shown that it doesn't. If they did E3 for gen ed, or at least most gen ed, and advanced math for the advanced math kids (level IV and anyone who meets the criteria by school), I doubt anyone would complain. E3 would be basic on grade standards plus and advanced math would stay as-is.

It is E^3 (cubed) - Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics.

Which is different than E3 Alliance (Education Equals Economics).

And yet FCPS E3 and E3 Alliance share similar objectives: increase the share of students taking Algebra 1 in 8th grade by delaying the jumping off point for acceleration to allow late bloomers to catch up. (E3 Alliance argues for waiting until 6th grade to accelerate students.) E3 Alliance partners with UT Austin and the Dana Center; the latter group led efforts to reform state math programs, including VMPI.

And yet they are not the same.

E3 != E^3

You left off a word. FCPS refers to it as E3 Network.

E3 Alliance uses the same word "network" to describe an effort to connect groups across the US who want education reform:
"In this effort, E3 Alliance is not alone. They are a part of a national network of nearly 70 communities across the United States, who are using and sharing best practices to provide better education outcomes." https://e3alliance.org/2023/04/04/e3-alliance-earns-strivetogether-systems-transformation-designation/

Where does E3 Alliance say that FCPS is one of those communities?

Where does FCPS say that E3 Alliance is source/“commercial site”?

They don’t. You are pulling this out of your butt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is OP. What’s E3

Previously known as “Equity Cubed.”

Essentially they eliminate advanced and accelerated math opportunities for the students who are capable of learning at a faster pace.

E3 is a prime example of “closing the racial achievement gap from the top down.”

E3 was never called Equity Cubed - at least not officially? I'm as skeptical about it as anyone, but the official name is "Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics (E3) Network." According to the woman who piloted it the point was that the VA math standards are too easy for most kids (I think most people can agree on this), so we should extend or enhance them.

What they never would give me a straight answer on was whether E3 kept as much acceleration as advanced math. And repeatedly it's been shown that it doesn't. If they did E3 for gen ed, or at least most gen ed, and advanced math for the advanced math kids (level IV and anyone who meets the criteria by school), I doubt anyone would complain. E3 would be basic on grade standards plus and advanced math would stay as-is.

It is E^3 (cubed) - Engaging, Enhanced, and Extended Mathematics.

Which is different than E3 Alliance (Education Equals Economics).

And yet FCPS E3 and E3 Alliance share similar objectives: increase the share of students taking Algebra 1 in 8th grade by delaying the jumping off point for acceleration to allow late bloomers to catch up. (E3 Alliance argues for waiting until 6th grade to accelerate students.) E3 Alliance partners with UT Austin and the Dana Center; the latter group led efforts to reform state math programs, including VMPI.

And yet they are not the same.

E3 != E^3

You left off a word. FCPS refers to it as E3 Network.

E3 Alliance uses the same word "network" to describe an effort to connect groups across the US who want education reform:
"In this effort, E3 Alliance is not alone. They are a part of a national network of nearly 70 communities across the United States, who are using and sharing best practices to provide better education outcomes." https://e3alliance.org/2023/04/04/e3-alliance-earns-strivetogether-systems-transformation-designation/

Where does E3 Alliance say that FCPS is one of those communities?

Where does FCPS say that E3 Alliance is source/“commercial site”?

They don’t. You are pulling this out of your butt.

FCPS provides no information on E3, nothing about its origin, structure, use, or outcomes. That is the problem.