S/O Integrated Algebra 3 course

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

Honors precalc is already a very challenging class, which many students who have done well with acceleration to that point struggle with. I don’t think they will add more standards to that.

They could create an honors integrated math sequence to cover 3 years of standards in 2, but they would also continue to have to offer integrated math 3 for students who are on the calc track but not ready for the accelerated course.

I also think that MCPS will try to get rid of compacted math, particularly if they offer the accelerated integrated math option to cover 3 years in 2. Otherwise, students on the advanced track will need to get through MVC in MCPS, and I doubt they want to offer this in all school (or think it is appropriate for most advanced kids).

-OP

They don’t want to offer this at every school. The program design team said calc ab/bc had to be offered for advanced students every single HS. No mention of mv

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the problem this is trying to solve?

A three-year sequence rearranges content so that students have geo and algebra each year — so there is not a one-year gap between the end of algebra 1 and the start of algebra 2, which is a reason some students who were successful with A1 struggle wuth A2.

The two-year MD sequence though is trying to cover just the basics so that students who will not take calc are not covering standards that aren’t relevant to them. They can pursue other courses after integrated algebra 2 rather than preparing for precalc. I guess the problem as they see it is that many students struggle with this content. They want to provide them with alternative choices.

-OP

Thanks for the explanation. The idea of removing the 1 year gap between Algebra 1/2 makes sense to me; condensing 3 years’ worth of math into 2 years at that level (elementary is different) does not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

Not all schools have MV.

Yup, but they will need to.

Not necessarily. Our school has been clear they will not have it and you have to go to MC or go without.

This is why the outcome of the Program Analysis needs to include MVC as a standard offering. Acceleration by 2 years heading into Algebra is and has been available across the county. Even before any shift to a 2-year Integrated Algebra sequence, a STEM-oriented "Calc path" at all high schools should be available as:

7th Algebra 1 (in MS)
8th Geometry (in MS)
9th Algebra 2
10th PreCalculus
11th AP Calculus BC
12th Multivariable Calculus

It doesn't meet need to force, unnecessarily, AB before BC for those capable when the latter encompasses the former or to fail to offer MVC immediately after BC to ensure conceptual/learning continuity (e.g., suggesting a student take Stats, instead). Some high schools clearly understand this and offer MVC. It isn't equitable if some do and others don't.

Of course, if they guarantee admission to the regional STEM magnet for any on that path in 7th/8th who might want it, they can reserve the teaching of MVC just to those magnets.

Well, they're going to have to figure something out because the state is requiring that all proficient math students be offered Algebra 1 no later than 8th grade, and since it will be a 2 year sequence they will finish that in 9th grade. So 3 years of post-IA math classes will be the standard for a large fraction of kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They should not write own curricula..so help us all. New name same old problems will continue

Improve math instruction. Each math class should have an assistant who can help 1:1 or small group. Families should not be expected to get a tutor.

Pre Alg
Alg 1
Math 2
Math 3
Pre-calc if going that route, Stats or other if not
Precalc 2, Stats 2
Calc 1
Advanced 2
Advanced 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They should not write own curricula..so help us all. New name same old problems will continue

Improve math instruction. Each math class should have an assistant who can help 1:1 or small group. Families should not be expected to get a tutor.

Pre Alg
Alg 1
Math 2
Math 3
Pre-calc if going that route, Stats or other if not
Precalc 2, Stats 2
Calc 1
Advanced 2
Advanced 3

Nicely said but this only works for a select group. We gave up and got a tutor as the curriculum and teaching style was not working for our kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They should not write own curricula..so help us all. New name same old problems will continue

Improve math instruction. Each math class should have an assistant who can help 1:1 or small group. Families should not be expected to get a tutor.

Pre Alg
Alg 1
Math 2
Math 3
Pre-calc if going that route, Stats or other if not
Precalc 2, Stats 2
Calc 1
Advanced 2
Advanced 3

Math 2? Math 3? All of Maryland is going to be required to take the 2-year Integrated Algebra sequence.

Precalc 2? Stats 2? For what purpose?

Which "Calc 1"?

At what grade are you suggesting this sequence begin? Going all the way back from "Advanced 3" in 12th, it looks like you have PreAlgebra in 4th.

With 160k students each taking a Math class, there would be a need for something in excess of a thousand roving assistants. At $50k each, that'd be $50M. How much would cohorting cost, instead?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

Not all schools have MV.

Yup, but they will need to.

Not necessarily. Our school has been clear they will not have it and you have to go to MC or go without.

This is why the outcome of the Program Analysis needs to include MVC as a standard offering. Acceleration by 2 years heading into Algebra is and has been available across the county. Even before any shift to a 2-year Integrated Algebra sequence, a STEM-oriented "Calc path" at all high schools should be available as:

7th Algebra 1 (in MS)
8th Geometry (in MS)
9th Algebra 2
10th PreCalculus
11th AP Calculus BC
12th Multivariable Calculus

It doesn't meet need to force, unnecessarily, AB before BC for those capable when the latter encompasses the former or to fail to offer MVC immediately after BC to ensure conceptual/learning continuity (e.g., suggesting a student take Stats, instead). Some high schools clearly understand this and offer MVC. It isn't equitable if some do and others don't.

Of course, if they guarantee admission to the regional STEM magnet for any on that path in 7th/8th who might want it, they can reserve the teaching of MVC just to those magnets.

Well, they're going to have to figure something out because the state is requiring that all proficient math students be offered Algebra 1 no later than 8th grade, and since it will be a 2 year sequence they will finish that in 9th grade. So 3 years of post-IA math classes will be the standard for a large fraction of kids.

Isn’t that what the Data Analytics, Statistics, etc piece is about? That seems like there will be business/CS classes that will be allowed for math credit. I’ve always thought they should allowed Econ to count as either a Math or SS course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

Not all schools have MV.

Yup, but they will need to.

Not necessarily. Our school has been clear they will not have it and you have to go to MC or go without.

This is why the outcome of the Program Analysis needs to include MVC as a standard offering. Acceleration by 2 years heading into Algebra is and has been available across the county. Even before any shift to a 2-year Integrated Algebra sequence, a STEM-oriented "Calc path" at all high schools should be available as:

7th Algebra 1 (in MS)
8th Geometry (in MS)
9th Algebra 2
10th PreCalculus
11th AP Calculus BC
12th Multivariable Calculus

It doesn't meet need to force, unnecessarily, AB before BC for those capable when the latter encompasses the former or to fail to offer MVC immediately after BC to ensure conceptual/learning continuity (e.g., suggesting a student take Stats, instead). Some high schools clearly understand this and offer MVC. It isn't equitable if some do and others don't.

Of course, if they guarantee admission to the regional STEM magnet for any on that path in 7th/8th who might want it, they can reserve the teaching of MVC just to those magnets.

Well, they're going to have to figure something out because the state is requiring that all proficient math students be offered Algebra 1 no later than 8th grade, and since it will be a 2 year sequence they will finish that in 9th grade. So 3 years of post-IA math classes will be the standard for a large fraction of kids.

Isn’t that what the Data Analytics, Statistics, etc piece is about? That seems like there will be business/CS classes that will be allowed for math credit. I’ve always thought they should allowed Econ to count as either a Math or SS course.

Econ is not allowed for graduation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They should not write own curricula..so help us all. New name same old problems will continue

Improve math instruction. Each math class should have an assistant who can help 1:1 or small group. Families should not be expected to get a tutor.

Pre Alg
Alg 1
Math 2
Math 3
Pre-calc if going that route, Stats or other if not
Precalc 2, Stats 2
Calc 1
Advanced 2
Advanced 3

Math 2? Math 3? All of Maryland is going to be required to take the 2-year Integrated Algebra sequence.

Precalc 2? Stats 2? For what purpose?

Which "Calc 1"?

At what grade are you suggesting this sequence begin? Going all the way back from "Advanced 3" in 12th, it looks like you have PreAlgebra in 4th.

With 160k students each taking a Math class, there would be a need for something in excess of a thousand roving assistants. At $50k each, that'd be $50M. How much would cohorting cost, instead?

Mcps wastes so much money. They can afford it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

Not all schools have MV.

Yup, but they will need to.

Not necessarily. Our school has been clear they will not have it and you have to go to MC or go without.

This is why the outcome of the Program Analysis needs to include MVC as a standard offering. Acceleration by 2 years heading into Algebra is and has been available across the county. Even before any shift to a 2-year Integrated Algebra sequence, a STEM-oriented "Calc path" at all high schools should be available as:

7th Algebra 1 (in MS)
8th Geometry (in MS)
9th Algebra 2
10th PreCalculus
11th AP Calculus BC
12th Multivariable Calculus

It doesn't meet need to force, unnecessarily, AB before BC for those capable when the latter encompasses the former or to fail to offer MVC immediately after BC to ensure conceptual/learning continuity (e.g., suggesting a student take Stats, instead). Some high schools clearly understand this and offer MVC. It isn't equitable if some do and others don't.

Of course, if they guarantee admission to the regional STEM magnet for any on that path in 7th/8th who might want it, they can reserve the teaching of MVC just to those magnets.

Well, they're going to have to figure something out because the state is requiring that all proficient math students be offered Algebra 1 no later than 8th grade, and since it will be a 2 year sequence they will finish that in 9th grade. So 3 years of post-IA math classes will be the standard for a large fraction of kids.

Where did the state say that kids need to be in A1 by 8th?

[Anonymous]

Here is a gift link to a Post article with info on why MD made this change (from just before it was adopted, when it was still a proposal):

https://wapo.st/44TQB3x

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

Not all schools have MV.

Yup, but they will need to.

Not necessarily. Our school has been clear they will not have it and you have to go to MC or go without.

This is why the outcome of the Program Analysis needs to include MVC as a standard offering. Acceleration by 2 years heading into Algebra is and has been available across the county. Even before any shift to a 2-year Integrated Algebra sequence, a STEM-oriented "Calc path" at all high schools should be available as:

7th Algebra 1 (in MS)
8th Geometry (in MS)
9th Algebra 2
10th PreCalculus
11th AP Calculus BC
12th Multivariable Calculus

It doesn't meet need to force, unnecessarily, AB before BC for those capable when the latter encompasses the former or to fail to offer MVC immediately after BC to ensure conceptual/learning continuity (e.g., suggesting a student take Stats, instead). Some high schools clearly understand this and offer MVC. It isn't equitable if some do and others don't.

Of course, if they guarantee admission to the regional STEM magnet for any on that path in 7th/8th who might want it, they can reserve the teaching of MVC just to those magnets.

Well, they're going to have to figure something out because the state is requiring that all proficient math students be offered Algebra 1 no later than 8th grade, and since it will be a 2 year sequence they will finish that in 9th grade. So 3 years of post-IA math classes will be the standard for a large fraction of kids.

Where did the state say that kids need to be in A1 by 8th?

It does not say that. This is what it says: "Beginning in grade 3, every school must offer an accelerated mathematics course progression that allows access to Integrated Algebra 1 by grade 8 for students who demonstrate readiness."

MCPS already does this by offering AMP 6+/7+, which puts students on track for Integrated Algebra 1 in 8th. But other students would take it in 9th. This is not a change.

And MCPS surely will add another class after Integrated Math 2 and prior to Pre-Calculus so that students can succeed in Pre-Calculus. For students who are "ready" for this sequence in 8th grade, it will look like:
8th: Integrated Math 1 (MSDE-required)
9th: Integrated Math 2 (MSDE-required)
10th: Integrated Math 3 (for students on calculus track only)
11th: Pre-Calculus
12th: Calculus

Students who are accelerated more and take Integrated Math 1 in 7th grade would get to calculus in 11th grade, as they do now, and would be able to take AP Stats if MVC is not available in their school (or take MVC through Montgomery College). I absolutely do not think MVC will be a standard offering in all schools.

-OP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

Not all schools have MV.

Yup, but they will need to.

Not necessarily. Our school has been clear they will not have it and you have to go to MC or go without.

This is why the outcome of the Program Analysis needs to include MVC as a standard offering. Acceleration by 2 years heading into Algebra is and has been available across the county. Even before any shift to a 2-year Integrated Algebra sequence, a STEM-oriented "Calc path" at all high schools should be available as:

7th Algebra 1 (in MS)
8th Geometry (in MS)
9th Algebra 2
10th PreCalculus
11th AP Calculus BC
12th Multivariable Calculus

It doesn't meet need to force, unnecessarily, AB before BC for those capable when the latter encompasses the former or to fail to offer MVC immediately after BC to ensure conceptual/learning continuity (e.g., suggesting a student take Stats, instead). Some high schools clearly understand this and offer MVC. It isn't equitable if some do and others don't.

Of course, if they guarantee admission to the regional STEM magnet for any on that path in 7th/8th who might want it, they can reserve the teaching of MVC just to those magnets.

Well, they're going to have to figure something out because the state is requiring that all proficient math students be offered Algebra 1 no later than 8th grade, and since it will be a 2 year sequence they will finish that in 9th grade. So 3 years of post-IA math classes will be the standard for a large fraction of kids.

Isn’t that what the Data Analytics, Statistics, etc piece is about? That seems like there will be business/CS classes that will be allowed for math credit. I’ve always thought they should allowed Econ to count as either a Math or SS course.

Econ is not allowed for graduation.

That’s the point, it should be allowed.

[Anonymous]

8th: Integrated Math 1 (MSDE-required)
9th: Integrated Math 2 (MSDE-required)
10th: PreCalculus w/Trig or Stats
11th: Calculus or AP Stats or Trigonometry
12: MVC or Calculus or AP Stats

8th: Integrated Math 1 (MSDE-required)
9th: Integrated Math 2 (MSDE-required)
10th: PreCalculus or PreCal w/ Trig
11th: Trig or AP Stats or Calculus
12: MVC or Calculus or AP Stats

—————-

7th: Integrated Math 1 (MSDE-required)
8th: Integrated Math 2 (MSDE-required)
9th: PreCalculus or PreCalculus w/Trig
10th: Trig or AP Stats or Calculus
11th: Calculus or AP Stats or MVC
12: Advance Stats or Data Analysis or DE math

Now I’m personally for a 3yr integrated math, but if that’s not allowed the above still makes sure kids of all stripes get a good foundation and have on ramps/off ramps

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:8th: Integrated Math 1 (MSDE-required)
9th: Integrated Math 2 (MSDE-required)
10th: PreCalculus w/Trig or Stats
11th: Calculus or AP Stats or Trigonometry
12: MVC or Calculus or AP Stats

8th: Integrated Math 1 (MSDE-required)
9th: Integrated Math 2 (MSDE-required)
10th: PreCalculus or PreCal w/ Trig
11th: Trig or AP Stats or Calculus
12: MVC or Calculus or AP Stats

—————-

7th: Integrated Math 1 (MSDE-required)
8th: Integrated Math 2 (MSDE-required)
9th: PreCalculus or PreCalculus w/Trig
10th: Trig or AP Stats or Calculus
11th: Calculus or AP Stats or MVC
12: Advance Stats or Data Analysis or DE math

Now I’m personally for a 3yr integrated math, but if that’s not allowed the above still makes sure kids of all stripes get a good foundation and have on ramps/off ramps

They are not going to have kids go straight from Integrated Math 2 to precalc. Students already struggle with that with the traditional three-year sequence. They will need to create a new course to prepare kids for precalc.