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

[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:

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”.

The point still stands. Around half of the kids at our school who take the 7th grade math SOL get a pass advanced. Again, not a center school. 4 kids getting a pass advanced means that the material is not being taught effectively, probably because they are trying to make up too much ground too fast. Currently, it's three years to do four years of math and then 7th grade math gets the whole of 6th grade. That puts kids in a position to do well in either algebra or pre-algebra in 7th. Trying to cram three years into two and not giving the full year for 7th grade in 6th sets kids up for failure in middle school

[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:

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”.

The point still stands. Around half of the kids at our school who take the 7th grade math SOL get a pass advanced. Again, not a center school. 4 kids getting a pass advanced means that the material is not being taught effectively, probably because they are trying to make up too much ground too fast. Currently, it's three years to do four years of math and then 7th grade math gets the whole of 6th grade. That puts kids in a position to do well in either algebra or pre-algebra in 7th. Trying to cram three years into two and not giving the full year for 7th grade in 6th sets kids up for failure in middle school

My kids school is the one with only 4 Passed Advanced on the 6th grade SOL in 5th grade. I know that there are kids that were in Advanced Math that surprised their parents and who were struggling. We know the parents and the kids. Instead of keeping the class smaller, the school insisted that the class had to be the same size as the regular math class, probably because they didn't want the other class to be huge. There were kids who didn't belong in the class, at least that is what their parents said, and I guarantee that slowed down instruction. This year the Advanced Math class is larger then any of the other math classes by a good amount. About 1/3 of the 6th graders are in the class.

The parents of the kids who are struggling are fine with it because the overall class is better behaved then the other classes and the parents plan is to have the kids take Math 7 in 7th grade, maybe 7 Honors. It is a bit ridiculous.

Someone suggested pulling my kid out of school sinc ehe is bored. Last I checked school was mandatory. We don't have the money to pay for a good private school that would meet our kids needs and we aboth work. The good news is he enjoys extra STEM activities and attending math classes outside of school so that is the route that we are taking. I feel bad for the kids who are bored and whose parents don't want to provide enrichment or can't provide enrichment. I feel bad for the kids who start school behind and fall farther behind. Overall, we are sacrificing other kids education in the name of a social experiment that is failing. I have no clue why people think this is a good idea or that it is benefiting anyone.

[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:

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”.

The point still stands. Around half of the kids at our school who take the 7th grade math SOL get a pass advanced. Again, not a center school. 4 kids getting a pass advanced means that the material is not being taught effectively, probably because they are trying to make up too much ground too fast. Currently, it's three years to do four years of math and then 7th grade math gets the whole of 6th grade. That puts kids in a position to do well in either algebra or pre-algebra in 7th. Trying to cram three years into two and not giving the full year for 7th grade in 6th sets kids up for failure in middle school

My kids school is the one with only 4 Passed Advanced on the 6th grade SOL in 5th grade. I know that there are kids that were in Advanced Math that surprised their parents and who were struggling. We know the parents and the kids. Instead of keeping the class smaller, the school insisted that the class had to be the same size as the regular math class, probably because they didn't want the other class to be huge. There were kids who didn't belong in the class, at least that is what their parents said, and I guarantee that slowed down instruction. This year the Advanced Math class is larger then any of the other math classes by a good amount. About 1/3 of the 6th graders are in the class.

The parents of the kids who are struggling are fine with it because the overall class is better behaved then the other classes and the parents plan is to have the kids take Math 7 in 7th grade, maybe 7 Honors. It is a bit ridiculous.

Someone suggested pulling my kid out of school sinc ehe is bored. Last I checked school was mandatory. We don't have the money to pay for a good private school that would meet our kids needs and we aboth work. The good news is he enjoys extra STEM activities and attending math classes outside of school so that is the route that we are taking. I feel bad for the kids who are bored and whose parents don't want to provide enrichment or can't provide enrichment. I feel bad for the kids who start school behind and fall farther behind. Overall, we are sacrificing other kids education in the name of a social experiment that is failing. I have no clue why people think this is a good idea or that it is benefiting anyone.

Is this at an E3 pilot school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn’t mean you can lie about it.

[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:

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”.

The point still stands. Around half of the kids at our school who take the 7th grade math SOL get a pass advanced. Again, not a center school. 4 kids getting a pass advanced means that the material is not being taught effectively, probably because they are trying to make up too much ground too fast. Currently, it's three years to do four years of math and then 7th grade math gets the whole of 6th grade. That puts kids in a position to do well in either algebra or pre-algebra in 7th. Trying to cram three years into two and not giving the full year for 7th grade in 6th sets kids up for failure in middle school

My kids school is the one with only 4 Passed Advanced on the 6th grade SOL in 5th grade. I know that there are kids that were in Advanced Math that surprised their parents and who were struggling. We know the parents and the kids. Instead of keeping the class smaller, the school insisted that the class had to be the same size as the regular math class, probably because they didn't want the other class to be huge. There were kids who didn't belong in the class, at least that is what their parents said, and I guarantee that slowed down instruction. This year the Advanced Math class is larger then any of the other math classes by a good amount. About 1/3 of the 6th graders are in the class.

The parents of the kids who are struggling are fine with it because the overall class is better behaved then the other classes and the parents plan is to have the kids take Math 7 in 7th grade, maybe 7 Honors. It is a bit ridiculous.

Someone suggested pulling my kid out of school sinc ehe is bored. Last I checked school was mandatory. We don't have the money to pay for a good private school that would meet our kids needs and we aboth work. The good news is he enjoys extra STEM activities and attending math classes outside of school so that is the route that we are taking. I feel bad for the kids who are bored and whose parents don't want to provide enrichment or can't provide enrichment. I feel bad for the kids who start school behind and fall farther behind. Overall, we are sacrificing other kids education in the name of a social experiment that is failing. I have no clue why people think this is a good idea or that it is benefiting anyone.

The old model would have given the school time to course correct. The classes are as big as a regular math class- advanced does not mean a better teacher to student ratio. By the time they get to 6th, you have two years of data points to see if they are capable of the acceleration or not. That lets kids who can handle it get moved in and kids who can't get moved out. You're also dealing with an extra quarter or half year's worth of math being added per year and then a whole year being devoted to 7th which sets the kids up to do well in Algebra without rushing the content. Instead of having to push all of 5th, 6th, and 7th into 5th and 6th

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn’t mean you can lie about it.

People speculate. If FCPS wasn't so terrible about communication with parents over issue they don't want to talk about, there would be less room for speculation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn’t mean you can lie about it.

People speculate. If FCPS wasn't so terrible about communication with parents over issue they don't want to talk about, there would be less room for speculation

Speculating is bad enough but PP was outright lying.

[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:

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”.

The point still stands. Around half of the kids at our school who take the 7th grade math SOL get a pass advanced. Again, not a center school. 4 kids getting a pass advanced means that the material is not being taught effectively, probably because they are trying to make up too much ground too fast. Currently, it's three years to do four years of math and then 7th grade math gets the whole of 6th grade. That puts kids in a position to do well in either algebra or pre-algebra in 7th. Trying to cram three years into two and not giving the full year for 7th grade in 6th sets kids up for failure in middle school

My kids school is the one with only 4 Passed Advanced on the 6th grade SOL in 5th grade. I know that there are kids that were in Advanced Math that surprised their parents and who were struggling. We know the parents and the kids. Instead of keeping the class smaller, the school insisted that the class had to be the same size as the regular math class, probably because they didn't want the other class to be huge. There were kids who didn't belong in the class, at least that is what their parents said, and I guarantee that slowed down instruction. This year the Advanced Math class is larger then any of the other math classes by a good amount. About 1/3 of the 6th graders are in the class.

The parents of the kids who are struggling are fine with it because the overall class is better behaved then the other classes and the parents plan is to have the kids take Math 7 in 7th grade, maybe 7 Honors. It is a bit ridiculous.

Someone suggested pulling my kid out of school sinc ehe is bored. Last I checked school was mandatory. We don't have the money to pay for a good private school that would meet our kids needs and we aboth work. The good news is he enjoys extra STEM activities and attending math classes outside of school so that is the route that we are taking. I feel bad for the kids who are bored and whose parents don't want to provide enrichment or can't provide enrichment. I feel bad for the kids who start school behind and fall farther behind. Overall, we are sacrificing other kids education in the name of a social experiment that is failing. I have no clue why people think this is a good idea or that it is benefiting anyone.

Is this at an E3 pilot school?

No clue, no one at the school has mentioned it.

[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: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.

Doesn’t mean you can lie about it.

People speculate. If FCPS wasn't so terrible about communication with parents over issue they don't want to talk about, there would be less room for speculation

Speculating is bad enough but PP was outright lying.

No. I noted similarities between the E3 Alliance and FCPS E3 Network. Those similarities are exactly as stated.

[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: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.

Doesn’t mean you can lie about it.

People speculate. If FCPS wasn't so terrible about communication with parents over issue they don't want to talk about, there would be less room for speculation

Speculating is bad enough but PP was outright lying.

No. I noted similarities between the E3 Alliance and FCPS E3 Network. Those similarities are exactly as stated.

And pretty glaring. Dana Center affiliation with VMPI and E3 alliance designed to increase 8th grade algebra. FCPS E3 math designed to increase 8th grade algebra and reuses much of the same language. Meh… close enough for me.

We do know both reduce acceleration for the most advanced (VMPI and FCPS E3), and that is all people should be concerned with. Adjust your DC enrichment accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Blatant lying:
E3 Alliance = “the commercial site for FCPS’s new equity math“

E3 Alliance isn’t the same thing as E^3 Network. No matter how much you push it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Blatant lying:
E3 Alliance = “the commercial site for FCPS’s new equity math“

E3 Alliance isn’t the same thing as E^3 Network. No matter how much you push it.

Are you part of FCPS E3? How do you know the factors influencing FCPS E3's genesis?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Blatant lying:
E3 Alliance = “the commercial site for FCPS’s new equity math“

E3 Alliance isn’t the same thing as E^3 Network. No matter how much you push it.

Results are the same… reduced acceleration for the most advanced learners and a push for 8th grade algebra.

Amazing naming coincidence and coincidental affiliation with VMPI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blatant lying:
E3 Alliance = “ the commercial site for FCPS’s new equity math“

E3 Alliance isn’t the same thing as E^3 Network. No matter how much you push it.

Results are the same… reduced acceleration for the most advanced learners and a push for 8th grade algebra.

Amazing naming coincidence and coincidental affiliation with VMPI.

None of that justifies being dishonest about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blatant lying:
E3 Alliance = “ the commercial site for FCPS’s new equity math“

E3 Alliance isn’t the same thing as E^3 Network. No matter how much you push it.

Results are the same… reduced acceleration for the most advanced learners and a push for 8th grade algebra.

Amazing naming coincidence and coincidental affiliation with VMPI.

None of that justifies being dishonest about it.

Oh that’s the other PP. I was actually unaware of the VMPI connection to the non-FCPS E3 which actually has the same stated goal. Pretty wild.