APS 6th grade pre algebra

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, they base math placement completely on test scores (& the cut-offs have changed multiple times over the years). They say they talk to the 5th grade math teacher, but I’m skeptical.
Just know that APS policy is that you CAN parent place, but they will not tell you this explicitly. We had to fight to get my kid into algebra in 7th (test scores weren’t quite what they wanted), and it went well. Kid is currently doing well in algebra II in 9th.
I don’t think extra math classes are necessary, but you could review some things with your child this summer if you’re concerned.

To what extent does parent placing apply? I assume you can't parent place a 1st grader into prealgebra. Also if parent placing is policy, why did you have to fight to get your kid into 7th grade algebra?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of parent placement, none of the accelerated math in Arlington middle school is in fact challenging for actually gifted math students. If you are even thinking of extra tutoring, though, sounds like your kid may not actually be so gifted.

This wasn’t our experience, but okay. Maybe your kid is super gifted. My kid did well in intensified algebra & geometry in MS, but it was a lot of work, and there were definitely smart kids who struggled/needed extra help.

1046 on the MI to take PRE-algebra is ridiculous. It used to be a 1030 to take algebra I. There has been a concerted effort to allow fewer & fewer kids to take the accelerated math track. This is not a secret.

Yup. I think it's great they are raising the bar.

If they required calculus skills as a prerequisite for 6th grade pre-algebra, would that be raising the bar too? Or would it indicate that they were setting a higher than needed threshold in order to scale back the number of students taking the course?

You can debate what would be the appropriate “bar”, but it is being raised.

But the appropriate level of the bar is the issue. If APS has set the bar above the skill level needed to succeed in 6th grade pre-algebra, then it is unwarrantably excluding kids who would otherwise do well in accelerated math. In that case, raising the bar is not a good thing, just as raising the bar to the level of calculus would not be a good thing.

From what I heard from the math dept too many kids were being pushed into it too early. And that’s why they needed to raise the bar.

I can see this anecdotally with my older kids’ peers in HS. The ones who really should have waited a year now hate math and haven’t been doing well.

The bar certainly is very far from “calculus”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of parent placement, none of the accelerated math in Arlington middle school is in fact challenging for actually gifted math students. If you are even thinking of extra tutoring, though, sounds like your kid may not actually be so gifted.

This wasn’t our experience, but okay. Maybe your kid is super gifted. My kid did well in intensified algebra & geometry in MS, but it was a lot of work, and there were definitely smart kids who struggled/needed extra help.

1046 on the MI to take PRE-algebra is ridiculous. It used to be a 1030 to take algebra I. There has been a concerted effort to allow fewer & fewer kids to take the accelerated math track. This is not a secret.

Yup. I think it's great they are raising the bar.

If they required calculus skills as a prerequisite for 6th grade pre-algebra, would that be raising the bar too? Or would it indicate that they were setting a higher than needed threshold in order to scale back the number of students taking the course?

You can debate what would be the appropriate “bar”, but it is being raised.

But the appropriate level of the bar is the issue. If APS has set the bar above the skill level needed to succeed in 6th grade pre-algebra, then it is unwarrantably excluding kids who would otherwise do well in accelerated math. In that case, raising the bar is not a good thing, just as raising the bar to the level of calculus would not be a good thing.

From what I heard from the math dept too many kids were being pushed into it too early. And that’s why they needed to raise the bar.

I can see this anecdotally with my older kids’ peers in HS. The ones who really should have waited a year now hate math and haven’t been doing well.

The bar certainly is very far from “calculus”.

It's just such a hard call. Lots of advanced kids are beyond bored in 5th grade math and their only option is to be bored again in 6th grade math or stretch for pre algebra. There's no in-between option. And many of these kids have literally never been challenged so it's completely unknown if they'd rise to the occasion. I'm sure some do and others struggle. I also strongly suspect that some kids who make the APS cutoffs also struggle because they got there by being forced fed math and not because they have true ability or interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, they base math placement completely on test scores (& the cut-offs have changed multiple times over the years). They say they talk to the 5th grade math teacher, but I’m skeptical.
Just know that APS policy is that you CAN parent place, but they will not tell you this explicitly. We had to fight to get my kid into algebra in 7th (test scores weren’t quite what they wanted), and it went well. Kid is currently doing well in algebra II in 9th.
I don’t think extra math classes are necessary, but you could review some things with your child this summer if you’re concerned.

To what extent does parent placing apply? I assume you can't parent place a 1st grader into prealgebra. Also if parent placing is policy, why did you have to fight to get your kid into 7th grade algebra?

Because I didn’t find out until after the fact that parent placement is the policy, and they initially just told us no. Then they agreed to reconsider after fall math testing (kid started in pre-algebra). After that, they moved him to algebra, where he had to make up a month’s worth of work in a short time, but it was well worth it.

I assume parent placement applies to classes open to kids in that grade, not a first grader taking pre-algebra.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, they base math placement completely on test scores (& the cut-offs have changed multiple times over the years). They say they talk to the 5th grade math teacher, but I’m skeptical.
Just know that APS policy is that you CAN parent place, but they will not tell you this explicitly. We had to fight to get my kid into algebra in 7th (test scores weren’t quite what they wanted), and it went well. Kid is currently doing well in algebra II in 9th.
I don’t think extra math classes are necessary, but you could review some things with your child this summer if you’re concerned.

To what extent does parent placing apply? I assume you can't parent place a 1st grader into prealgebra. Also if parent placing is policy, why did you have to fight to get your kid into 7th grade algebra?

Because I didn’t find out until after the fact that parent placement is the policy, and they initially just told us no. Then they agreed to reconsider after fall math testing (kid started in pre-algebra). After that, they moved him to algebra, where he had to make up a month’s worth of work in a short time, but it was well worth it.

I assume parent placement applies to classes open to kids in that grade, not a first grader taking pre-algebra.

Was this recently? I wish I would have know skipping pre-algebra was an option

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of parent placement, none of the accelerated math in Arlington middle school is in fact challenging for actually gifted math students. If you are even thinking of extra tutoring, though, sounds like your kid may not actually be so gifted.

This wasn’t our experience, but okay. Maybe your kid is super gifted. My kid did well in intensified algebra & geometry in MS, but it was a lot of work, and there were definitely smart kids who struggled/needed extra help.

1046 on the MI to take PRE-algebra is ridiculous. It used to be a 1030 to take algebra I. There has been a concerted effort to allow fewer & fewer kids to take the accelerated math track. This is not a secret.

Yup. I think it's great they are raising the bar.

If they required calculus skills as a prerequisite for 6th grade pre-algebra, would that be raising the bar too? Or would it indicate that they were setting a higher than needed threshold in order to scale back the number of students taking the course?

You can debate what would be the appropriate “bar”, but it is being raised.

But the appropriate level of the bar is the issue. If APS has set the bar above the skill level needed to succeed in 6th grade pre-algebra, then it is unwarrantably excluding kids who would otherwise do well in accelerated math. In that case, raising the bar is not a good thing, just as raising the bar to the level of calculus would not be a good thing.

From what I heard from the math dept too many kids were being pushed into it too early. And that’s why they needed to raise the bar.

I can see this anecdotally with my older kids’ peers in HS. The ones who really should have waited a year now hate math and haven’t been doing well.

The bar certainly is very far from “calculus”.

The calculus reference was responding to a poster who said that raising the bar is generically good. The point was that it's not good if you raise the bar higher than it needs to be.

re: stresses. Historically, the main stresses have been seen in students who were put into 8th grade Algebra 1 prematurely & weren't ready, not the kids in 7th grade Algebra 1. There was concern a decade or so ago over 6th grade prealgebra because APS had opted to skip some content altogether in this course, but then APS shifted to compacting content instead which worked better. The problem then was not the acceleration itself but the way in which they were doing it.

[Anonymous]

We parent placed into pre algebra. My kid was just on the cut off. I emailed and she replied quickly saying yes and no problem. A friend parent placed and had to fight for it. Same school same math contact so maybe they do talk to teachers or my kids scores were closer or something. No idea. Anyway, my kid has had 100% in the class the past two semesters so I think it was the right choice. He has needed no tutoring or extra help and it has been good he finally feels challenged.

He also just scored very well on the winter VGA and MAP. But my kid is extremely highly motivated and his goal is TJHSST and then a STEM career. My other kid who is also very good at math but lacks the drive? I probably won't push placement for him

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of parent placement, none of the accelerated math in Arlington middle school is in fact challenging for actually gifted math students. If you are even thinking of extra tutoring, though, sounds like your kid may not actually be so gifted.

This wasn’t our experience, but okay. Maybe your kid is super gifted. My kid did well in intensified algebra & geometry in MS, but it was a lot of work, and there were definitely smart kids who struggled/needed extra help.

1046 on the MI to take PRE-algebra is ridiculous. It used to be a 1030 to take algebra I. There has been a concerted effort to allow fewer & fewer kids to take the accelerated math track. This is not a secret.

Yup. I think it's great they are raising the bar.

If they required calculus skills as a prerequisite for 6th grade pre-algebra, would that be raising the bar too? Or would it indicate that they were setting a higher than needed threshold in order to scale back the number of students taking the course?

You can debate what would be the appropriate “bar”, but it is being raised.

But the appropriate level of the bar is the issue. If APS has set the bar above the skill level needed to succeed in 6th grade pre-algebra, then it is unwarrantably excluding kids who would otherwise do well in accelerated math. In that case, raising the bar is not a good thing, just as raising the bar to the level of calculus would not be a good thing.

From what I heard from the math dept too many kids were being pushed into it too early. And that’s why they needed to raise the bar.

I can see this anecdotally with my older kids’ peers in HS. The ones who really should have waited a year now hate math and haven’t been doing well.

The bar certainly is very far from “calculus”.

It's just such a hard call. Lots of advanced kids are beyond bored in 5th grade math and their only option is to be bored again in 6th grade math or stretch for pre algebra. There's no in-between option. And many of these kids have literally never been challenged so it's completely unknown if they'd rise to the occasion. I'm sure some do and others struggle. I also strongly suspect that some kids who make the APS cutoffs also struggle because they got there by being forced fed math and not because they have true ability or interest.

Hopefully the new intensified courses can provide extra depth/enrichment so kids can be challenged without over-accelerating them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of parent placement, none of the accelerated math in Arlington middle school is in fact challenging for actually gifted math students. If you are even thinking of extra tutoring, though, sounds like your kid may not actually be so gifted.

This wasn’t our experience, but okay. Maybe your kid is super gifted. My kid did well in intensified algebra & geometry in MS, but it was a lot of work, and there were definitely smart kids who struggled/needed extra help.

1046 on the MI to take PRE-algebra is ridiculous. It used to be a 1030 to take algebra I. There has been a concerted effort to allow fewer & fewer kids to take the accelerated math track. This is not a secret.

Yup. I think it's great they are raising the bar.

If they required calculus skills as a prerequisite for 6th grade pre-algebra, would that be raising the bar too? Or would it indicate that they were setting a higher than needed threshold in order to scale back the number of students taking the course?

You can debate what would be the appropriate “bar”, but it is being raised.

But the appropriate level of the bar is the issue. If APS has set the bar above the skill level needed to succeed in 6th grade pre-algebra, then it is unwarrantably excluding kids who would otherwise do well in accelerated math. In that case, raising the bar is not a good thing, just as raising the bar to the level of calculus would not be a good thing.

From what I heard from the math dept too many kids were being pushed into it too early. And that’s why they needed to raise the bar.

I can see this anecdotally with my older kids’ peers in HS. The ones who really should have waited a year now hate math and haven’t been doing well.

The bar certainly is very far from “calculus”.

The calculus reference was responding to a poster who said that raising the bar is generically good. The point was that it's not good if you raise the bar higher than it needs to be.

re: stresses. Historically, the main stresses have been seen in students who were put into 8th grade Algebra 1 prematurely & weren't ready, not the kids in 7th grade Algebra 1. There was concern a decade or so ago over 6th grade prealgebra because APS had opted to skip some content altogether in this course, but then APS shifted to compacting content instead which worked better. The problem then was not the acceleration itself but the way in which they were doing it.

If we are looking at what is actually happening in APS and not some random hypothetical, raising the bar is good. The bar was too low based on too bad outcomes. Kids were rushing through and not retaining much or enjoying the content.

The kids I know who are now struggling in HS because they were rushed too much too early would have been in Alg 1 in 7th 4-5 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of parent placement, none of the accelerated math in Arlington middle school is in fact challenging for actually gifted math students. If you are even thinking of extra tutoring, though, sounds like your kid may not actually be so gifted.

This wasn’t our experience, but okay. Maybe your kid is super gifted. My kid did well in intensified algebra & geometry in MS, but it was a lot of work, and there were definitely smart kids who struggled/needed extra help.

1046 on the MI to take PRE-algebra is ridiculous. It used to be a 1030 to take algebra I. There has been a concerted effort to allow fewer & fewer kids to take the accelerated math track. This is not a secret.

Yup. I think it's great they are raising the bar.

If they required calculus skills as a prerequisite for 6th grade pre-algebra, would that be raising the bar too? Or would it indicate that they were setting a higher than needed threshold in order to scale back the number of students taking the course?

You can debate what would be the appropriate “bar”, but it is being raised.

But the appropriate level of the bar is the issue. If APS has set the bar above the skill level needed to succeed in 6th grade pre-algebra, then it is unwarrantably excluding kids who would otherwise do well in accelerated math. In that case, raising the bar is not a good thing, just as raising the bar to the level of calculus would not be a good thing.

From what I heard from the math dept too many kids were being pushed into it too early. And that’s why they needed to raise the bar.

I can see this anecdotally with my older kids’ peers in HS. The ones who really should have waited a year now hate math and haven’t been doing well.

The bar certainly is very far from “calculus”.

It's just such a hard call. Lots of advanced kids are beyond bored in 5th grade math and their only option is to be bored again in 6th grade math or stretch for pre algebra. There's no in-between option. And many of these kids have literally never been challenged so it's completely unknown if they'd rise to the occasion. I'm sure some do and others struggle. I also strongly suspect that some kids who make the APS cutoffs also struggle because they got there by being forced fed math and not because they have true ability or interest.

Hopefully the new intensified courses can provide extra depth/enrichment so kids can be challenged without over-accelerating them.

Yeah, it may help in other subjects, but won't help in math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, they base math placement completely on test scores (& the cut-offs have changed multiple times over the years). They say they talk to the 5th grade math teacher, but I’m skeptical.
Just know that APS policy is that you CAN parent place, but they will not tell you this explicitly. We had to fight to get my kid into algebra in 7th (test scores weren’t quite what they wanted), and it went well. Kid is currently doing well in algebra II in 9th.
I don’t think extra math classes are necessary, but you could review some things with your child this summer if you’re concerned.

To what extent does parent placing apply? I assume you can't parent place a 1st grader into prealgebra. Also if parent placing is policy, why did you have to fight to get your kid into 7th grade algebra?

Because I didn’t find out until after the fact that parent placement is the policy, and they initially just told us no. Then they agreed to reconsider after fall math testing (kid started in pre-algebra). After that, they moved him to algebra, where he had to make up a month’s worth of work in a short time, but it was well worth it.

I assume parent placement applies to classes open to kids in that grade, not a first grader taking pre-algebra.

Was this recently? I wish I would have know skipping pre-algebra was an option

Kid is currently in 9th. It was a weird year because 6th grade was virtual, and they didn’t cover as much as the class that had been Math 6-7-8. But they also raised the test scores they required to take algebra in 7th that year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of parent placement, none of the accelerated math in Arlington middle school is in fact challenging for actually gifted math students. If you are even thinking of extra tutoring, though, sounds like your kid may not actually be so gifted.

This wasn’t our experience, but okay. Maybe your kid is super gifted. My kid did well in intensified algebra & geometry in MS, but it was a lot of work, and there were definitely smart kids who struggled/needed extra help.

1046 on the MI to take PRE-algebra is ridiculous. It used to be a 1030 to take algebra I. There has been a concerted effort to allow fewer & fewer kids to take the accelerated math track. This is not a secret.

Yup. I think it's great they are raising the bar.

If they required calculus skills as a prerequisite for 6th grade pre-algebra, would that be raising the bar too? Or would it indicate that they were setting a higher than needed threshold in order to scale back the number of students taking the course?

You can debate what would be the appropriate “bar”, but it is being raised.

But the appropriate level of the bar is the issue. If APS has set the bar above the skill level needed to succeed in 6th grade pre-algebra, then it is unwarrantably excluding kids who would otherwise do well in accelerated math. In that case, raising the bar is not a good thing, just as raising the bar to the level of calculus would not be a good thing.

From what I heard from the math dept too many kids were being pushed into it too early. And that’s why they needed to raise the bar.

I can see this anecdotally with my older kids’ peers in HS. The ones who really should have waited a year now hate math and haven’t been doing well.

The bar certainly is very far from “calculus”.

The calculus reference was responding to a poster who said that raising the bar is generically good. The point was that it's not good if you raise the bar higher than it needs to be.

re: stresses. Historically, the main stresses have been seen in students who were put into 8th grade Algebra 1 prematurely & weren't ready, not the kids in 7th grade Algebra 1. There was concern a decade or so ago over 6th grade prealgebra because APS had opted to skip some content altogether in this course, but then APS shifted to compacting content instead which worked better. The problem then was not the acceleration itself but the way in which they were doing it.

If we are looking at what is actually happening in APS and not some random hypothetical, raising the bar is good. The bar was too low based on too bad outcomes. Kids were rushing through and not retaining much or enjoying the content.

The kids I know who are now struggling in HS because they were rushed too much too early would have been in Alg 1 in 7th 4-5 years ago.

Students in high school now took their formative math classes remotely during covid. Many students are struggling in math and other courses as a result, accelerated or not. This has no bearing on whether the correct level has been chosen for algebra readiness. Math Inventory defines algebra readiness as 1030. And yet, APS set the readiness level for pre-algebra above that. That is illogical and shows that they set an excessively high bar.

[Anonymous]

The scores are different every year. My kid was higher than the lower limit, but didn’t get recommended for pre algebra because there were too many kids who were over the limit abd not enough seats in classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of parent placement, none of the accelerated math in Arlington middle school is in fact challenging for actually gifted math students. If you are even thinking of extra tutoring, though, sounds like your kid may not actually be so gifted.

This wasn’t our experience, but okay. Maybe your kid is super gifted. My kid did well in intensified algebra & geometry in MS, but it was a lot of work, and there were definitely smart kids who struggled/needed extra help.

1046 on the MI to take PRE-algebra is ridiculous. It used to be a 1030 to take algebra I. There has been a concerted effort to allow fewer & fewer kids to take the accelerated math track. This is not a secret.

Yup. I think it's great they are raising the bar.

If they required calculus skills as a prerequisite for 6th grade pre-algebra, would that be raising the bar too? Or would it indicate that they were setting a higher than needed threshold in order to scale back the number of students taking the course?

You can debate what would be the appropriate “bar”, but it is being raised.

But the appropriate level of the bar is the issue. If APS has set the bar above the skill level needed to succeed in 6th grade pre-algebra, then it is unwarrantably excluding kids who would otherwise do well in accelerated math. In that case, raising the bar is not a good thing, just as raising the bar to the level of calculus would not be a good thing.

From what I heard from the math dept too many kids were being pushed into it too early. And that’s why they needed to raise the bar.

I can see this anecdotally with my older kids’ peers in HS. The ones who really should have waited a year now hate math and haven’t been doing well.

The bar certainly is very far from “calculus”.

The calculus reference was responding to a poster who said that raising the bar is generically good. The point was that it's not good if you raise the bar higher than it needs to be.

re: stresses. Historically, the main stresses have been seen in students who were put into 8th grade Algebra 1 prematurely & weren't ready, not the kids in 7th grade Algebra 1. There was concern a decade or so ago over 6th grade prealgebra because APS had opted to skip some content altogether in this course, but then APS shifted to compacting content instead which worked better. The problem then was not the acceleration itself but the way in which they were doing it.

If we are looking at what is actually happening in APS and not some random hypothetical, raising the bar is good. The bar was too low based on too bad outcomes. Kids were rushing through and not retaining much or enjoying the content.

The kids I know who are now struggling in HS because they were rushed too much too early would have been in Alg 1 in 7th 4-5 years ago.

Students in high school now took their formative math classes remotely during covid. Many students are struggling in math and other courses as a result, accelerated or not. This has no bearing on whether the correct level has been chosen for algebra readiness. Math Inventory defines algebra readiness as 1030. And yet, APS set the readiness level for pre-algebra above that. That is illogical and shows that they set an excessively high bar.

The difference is that many of kids who seemed to have appropriate placement are all fine with math now. Some are killing it. At least anecdotally in our circles.

The math dept person made the comments about seeing bad retention in HS and raising the bar *before* the pandemic. It was when we were first looking at the pathways for our oldest kid and I believe they had just stopped allowing 6th graders to take Alg 1.

APS is using the tests as data points. They were not seeing good outcomes so they adjusted.

The vast majority of bright kids are fine with algebra 1 in 8th. Only the truly advanced/motivated should take it in 7th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of parent placement, none of the accelerated math in Arlington middle school is in fact challenging for actually gifted math students. If you are even thinking of extra tutoring, though, sounds like your kid may not actually be so gifted.

This wasn’t our experience, but okay. Maybe your kid is super gifted. My kid did well in intensified algebra & geometry in MS, but it was a lot of work, and there were definitely smart kids who struggled/needed extra help.

1046 on the MI to take PRE-algebra is ridiculous. It used to be a 1030 to take algebra I. There has been a concerted effort to allow fewer & fewer kids to take the accelerated math track. This is not a secret.

Yup. I think it's great they are raising the bar.

If they required calculus skills as a prerequisite for 6th grade pre-algebra, would that be raising the bar too? Or would it indicate that they were setting a higher than needed threshold in order to scale back the number of students taking the course?

You can debate what would be the appropriate “bar”, but it is being raised.

But the appropriate level of the bar is the issue. If APS has set the bar above the skill level needed to succeed in 6th grade pre-algebra, then it is unwarrantably excluding kids who would otherwise do well in accelerated math. In that case, raising the bar is not a good thing, just as raising the bar to the level of calculus would not be a good thing.

From what I heard from the math dept too many kids were being pushed into it too early. And that’s why they needed to raise the bar.

I can see this anecdotally with my older kids’ peers in HS. The ones who really should have waited a year now hate math and haven’t been doing well.

The bar certainly is very far from “calculus”.

The calculus reference was responding to a poster who said that raising the bar is generically good. The point was that it's not good if you raise the bar higher than it needs to be.

re: stresses. Historically, the main stresses have been seen in students who were put into 8th grade Algebra 1 prematurely & weren't ready, not the kids in 7th grade Algebra 1. There was concern a decade or so ago over 6th grade prealgebra because APS had opted to skip some content altogether in this course, but then APS shifted to compacting content instead which worked better. The problem then was not the acceleration itself but the way in which they were doing it.

If we are looking at what is actually happening in APS and not some random hypothetical, raising the bar is good. The bar was too low based on too bad outcomes. Kids were rushing through and not retaining much or enjoying the content.

The kids I know who are now struggling in HS because they were rushed too much too early would have been in Alg 1 in 7th 4-5 years ago.

Students in high school now took their formative math classes remotely during covid. Many students are struggling in math and other courses as a result, accelerated or not. This has no bearing on whether the correct level has been chosen for algebra readiness. Math Inventory defines algebra readiness as 1030. And yet, APS set the readiness level for pre-algebra above that. That is illogical and shows that they set an excessively high bar.

The difference is that many of kids who seemed to have appropriate placement are all fine with math now. Some are killing it. At least anecdotally in our circles.

The math dept person made the comments about seeing bad retention in HS and raising the bar *before* the pandemic. It was when we were first looking at the pathways for our oldest kid and I believe they had just stopped allowing 6th graders to take Alg 1.

APS is using the tests as data points. They were not seeing good outcomes so they adjusted.

The vast majority of bright kids are fine with algebra 1 in 8th. Only the truly advanced/motivated should take it in 7th.

Comments made before the pandemic were referencing the period when APS skipped content and stresses arose because of how APS implemented acceleration. re: covid. Compacted classes would be most vulnerable to learning loss because they cover the most content. But that is a one-time shock. You don't change acceleration policy permanently in response to a one-time shock. Many students have and are doing well with accelerated math. FCPS has maintained constant qualification thresholds for 7th grade Algebra throughout, which is consistent with the established idea of linking accelerated qualification to specific content knowledge. No other NoVa district is swinging their qualification thresholds around yearly like APS.