Integrated Math roll out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the current pre algebra students will do regular algebra 1 next year but the current AMP 6+ will do Integrated algebra in 8th? Or 7th?

2025-26 | 6th | AMP6+
2026-27 | 7th | AMP7+
2027-28 | 8th | Integrated Algebra 1
2028-29 | 9th | Integrated Algebra 2
2029-30 | 10th | [Uncertain as of yet]

Ok. That makes sense. So current AMP 6+ students will catch up with current pre algebra students in 10th grade when they both are in precalc.

I would not want my kid to go onto Precalc after the integrated algebra sequence. That's a hard class, and integrated algebra leaves out standards. They should have created a three-year integrated algebra sequence like other states have done. But instead, MD went its own way and just does 2 years, with standards left out.

I'm guessing there will be a two-class pre-calc sequence that includes what's missing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the current pre algebra students will do regular algebra 1 next year but the current AMP 6+ will do Integrated algebra in 8th? Or 7th?

2025-26 | 6th | AMP6+
2026-27 | 7th | AMP7+
2027-28 | 8th | Integrated Algebra 1
2028-29 | 9th | Integrated Algebra 2
2029-30 | 10th | [Uncertain as of yet]

Ok. That makes sense. So current AMP 6+ students will catch up with current pre algebra students in 10th grade when they both are in precalc.

I would not want my kid to go onto Precalc after the integrated algebra sequence. That's a hard class, and integrated algebra leaves out standards. They should have created a three-year integrated algebra sequence like other states have done. But instead, MD went its own way and just does 2 years, with standards left out.

I'm guessing there will be a two-class pre-calc sequence that includes what's missing.

I hope so, but I don't have much faith in MCPS.

[Anonymous]

The key feature of the new curriculum is the absolute absence of any specific plan for AP calculus-bound learners. "No learners left behind" refers to the bottom half. Stopping teaching the top half serves "equity" goals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The key feature of the new curriculum is the absolute absence of any specific plan for AP calculus-bound learners. "No learners left behind" refers to the bottom half. Stopping teaching the top half serves "equity" goals.

+1
If your kids alwabt to take calculus, get ready to pay for RSM or AoPS if you aren’t already doing so.

[Anonymous]

So the thinking is that a lot of high schoolers don't need geometry, so it's eliminated as a requirement... but it's not going to be offered to kids who do need it as a pre-req to trig/calc/physics?

[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:The MSDE (state)-mandated switch to Integrated Algebra 1 will start in the 2027-28 school year for those having completed (or having shown mastery in exceptional cases) the pre-Algebra content that is the on-grade-level expectation for middle school through grade 8. This is whether completeing it under MCPS acceleration (PreAlgebra, the combination of AMP6+ and AMP7+ or Math 8 taken a year early due to prior acceleration in 4/5, 5/6 or otherwise).

Integrated Algebra 2 will follow in 2028-29. For a time, both the new Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 and the current Algebra 1, Geometry and Algebra 2 will be taught, depending on when the student completed pre-Algebra and began one or other sequence. For those taking the new courses, the state assessment will be administered at the end of Integrated Algebra 2.

Those currently in AMP6+ likely will take AMP7+ next year (covering 6th, 7th & 8th grade standards in 2 years), then Integrated Algebra 1 the following year. It is unclear if there will be honors versions of these.

Those currently in PreAlgebra (the current name of the more accelerated course that covers 7th & 8th grade standards in one year) likely will take Algebra 1 next year, followed by Geometry and Algebra 2 (likely honors versions of the latter two; there is no honors version of the current state-mandated Algebra 1 course).

Though completing the overall Algebra sequence at the same time, will be a disconnect between the two groups, as Integrated Algebra will not cover all of the topics that the current sequence does (e.g., Trigonometry). It is unclear how or whether MCPS and other MD county school systems will account for this difference in later courses, whether requiring repetition of content within a new PreCalc for those having taken the current sequence, insertion of a pre-PreCalc course for those having taken the newer sequence, or some other set of options, such as maintaining two versions of PreCalc until all taking the current sequence finish.

1. Thank you for the level of detail and insight. It's more than we've gotten from MCPS!

2. It sounds really complicated and messy to have the concurrent math tracks and classes. How will MCPS staff and register all of that?

Happy to support where I have gotten some insight, myself. (Caveat -- no ex cathedra, here; just another parent.)

I don't know if there are extra state funds associated with managing the change. I expect it likely will be an unfunded mandate that MCPS has to navigate. They've been on it for a little while, though, and there is some time (if barely, given long lead times for curriculum sourcing and the atypical nature of the courses in question) for full policy/planning/training/staff allocation.

I do hope that they don't end up with having the one class forced to repeat learning (especially as they generally have demonstrated affinity for and/or ability related to the subject already) or the other forced to slow-march. I think they can come up with a set of classes that would be flexible to student ability/need into the future, allowing a few extra periods of coverage for about two years to manage both old and new.

There won’t be any “repeat learning.” The few students affected will just be going deeper in the relevant math level.

Your two sentences contradict each other. Either there are students affected by being forced to repeat content or there aren't.

There would be, and they wouldn't be few. If the current forms of PreCalc are not preserved for a year after the new curriculum completes its implementation, but, instead, is altered for all such that it incorporates that content lost in the new IA curriculum, any students who would be finishing the current Algebra 2 (which already covers that content) the year prior would be repeating learning of that content.

If they move that content, instead, to a course between IA 2 and PreCalc, that might cause a slowdown (not as compared to current, but as compared to acceleration possible) for those of high ability coming out of IA2. However, that would allow those finishing Algebra 2 at the same time to continue with PreCalc without the repetition.

MCPS will be taking a blended approach. No learners are getting left out here. This has been covered before.

Where?

It would be good to know that MCPS will be setting things up such that those finishing Algebra 1 / Honors Geometry / Honors Algebra 2 then will be able to take Honors PreCalc, as they currently do, and that that course won't have been altered to introduce already-covered material missing from the new Integrated Algebra curriculum. And that those of high mathematical ability exiting Integrated Algebra 2 at the same time can look forward to a suitably challenging/meaningful course that year as they embark on the Calculus path.

Because, in addition to meeting the needs of a majority or large plurality, that's the kind of thing that "No learners are getting left out here" would tend to mean.

Seriously repeating of concepts )if that happens) is not going to hurt any student. If anything it will reinforce material which seems to already be something that is needed. Let’s not create problems where they don’t exist.

The biggest question that exist is curriculum since most Integrated Maths on the market are 3 years not 2. What missing material needs to be added to PreCal or of its enough for an intermediary Math3 course. And finally what other new courses are going to be classified as eligible for math towards graduation.

Why is math moving to a two year sequence from three?

It's a new statewide MSDE requirement. I think the idea is that kids who aren't going on to calculus don't need the full 3 years of algebra/geometry and should be able to move on to other types of math sooner, and the calc-bound kids can catch up on it after.

What other types of math sooner?

There will be 4 different pathways post-Integrated algebra.:

"i. Quantitative Reasoning pathway develops real-world mathematical skills in
problem-solving, modeling, financial literacy, and data-driven decision-making.

ii. Data and Data Analytics are increasingly essential, and this pathway builds
foundational skills in data analysis, programming, and mathematical reasoning.
It leverages technology to explore real-world datasets and prepare students for
a data-driven future.

iii. Algebraic Foundations of Calculus pathway is designed for students pursuing
STEM fields. It provides a deep exploration of functions and change in
preparation for Calculus.

iv. Statistics and Probability builds students’ understanding of data, uncertainty,
and statistical inference. It focuses on using quantitative research on real-world
phenomena to enhance understanding of relationships in the world around us."

As a non-STEM family, I really love this idea. I had calculus in HS when none of my future plans came anywhere near requiring it. I liked it fine, but I have never used mathematics higher than percentages in my entire professional life. What I _could_ have used and would have benefited greatly from is statistics.

I hope we are seeing in concepts like this the potential for broader thinking about HS curricula. There are many ways to use what mathematics teaches to help students improve the ways they reason about the world, and to support them in preparing for their careers. Right now colleges seem often to anticipate calculus from high-achieving non-STEM high schoolers in order to construe them as having completed rigorous or "most rigorous" coursework. It will probably take some time to shift students' and familiies' views away from that, and some of them may never shift. But I would hate to see a framework like this be limited by an implicit insistence that "A" level students have to take calculus even if they are planning to major in studio art.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the thinking is that a lot of high schoolers don't need geometry, so it's eliminated as a requirement... but it's not going to be offered to kids who do need it as a pre-req to trig/calc/physics?

Geometry is not being "eliminated" per se, it's being integrated into the two algebra courses, supposedly.

I understand your skepticism on how they can do that and maintain a meaningful understanding and learning of geometry that is equal to what they would have gotten with it as a standalone class, but that is what they're purporting to do....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the thinking is that a lot of high schoolers don't need geometry, so it's eliminated as a requirement... but it's not going to be offered to kids who do need it as a pre-req to trig/calc/physics?

Geometry is not being "eliminated" per se, it's being integrated into the two algebra courses, supposedly.

I understand your skepticism on how they can do that and maintain a meaningful understanding and learning of geometry that is equal to what they would have gotten with it as a standalone class, but that is what they're purporting to do....

Yeah, I understand smushing 3 years into 2 for elementary math, but don't think it's a good idea later on here.

[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:The MSDE (state)-mandated switch to Integrated Algebra 1 will start in the 2027-28 school year for those having completed (or having shown mastery in exceptional cases) the pre-Algebra content that is the on-grade-level expectation for middle school through grade 8. This is whether completeing it under MCPS acceleration (PreAlgebra, the combination of AMP6+ and AMP7+ or Math 8 taken a year early due to prior acceleration in 4/5, 5/6 or otherwise).

Integrated Algebra 2 will follow in 2028-29. For a time, both the new Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 and the current Algebra 1, Geometry and Algebra 2 will be taught, depending on when the student completed pre-Algebra and began one or other sequence. For those taking the new courses, the state assessment will be administered at the end of Integrated Algebra 2.

Those currently in AMP6+ likely will take AMP7+ next year (covering 6th, 7th & 8th grade standards in 2 years), then Integrated Algebra 1 the following year. It is unclear if there will be honors versions of these.

Those currently in PreAlgebra (the current name of the more accelerated course that covers 7th & 8th grade standards in one year) likely will take Algebra 1 next year, followed by Geometry and Algebra 2 (likely honors versions of the latter two; there is no honors version of the current state-mandated Algebra 1 course).

Though completing the overall Algebra sequence at the same time, will be a disconnect between the two groups, as Integrated Algebra will not cover all of the topics that the current sequence does (e.g., Trigonometry). It is unclear how or whether MCPS and other MD county school systems will account for this difference in later courses, whether requiring repetition of content within a new PreCalc for those having taken the current sequence, insertion of a pre-PreCalc course for those having taken the newer sequence, or some other set of options, such as maintaining two versions of PreCalc until all taking the current sequence finish.

1. Thank you for the level of detail and insight. It's more than we've gotten from MCPS!

2. It sounds really complicated and messy to have the concurrent math tracks and classes. How will MCPS staff and register all of that?

Happy to support where I have gotten some insight, myself. (Caveat -- no ex cathedra, here; just another parent.)

I don't know if there are extra state funds associated with managing the change. I expect it likely will be an unfunded mandate that MCPS has to navigate. They've been on it for a little while, though, and there is some time (if barely, given long lead times for curriculum sourcing and the atypical nature of the courses in question) for full policy/planning/training/staff allocation.

I do hope that they don't end up with having the one class forced to repeat learning (especially as they generally have demonstrated affinity for and/or ability related to the subject already) or the other forced to slow-march. I think they can come up with a set of classes that would be flexible to student ability/need into the future, allowing a few extra periods of coverage for about two years to manage both old and new.

There won’t be any “repeat learning.” The few students affected will just be going deeper in the relevant math level.

Your two sentences contradict each other. Either there are students affected by being forced to repeat content or there aren't.

There would be, and they wouldn't be few. If the current forms of PreCalc are not preserved for a year after the new curriculum completes its implementation, but, instead, is altered for all such that it incorporates that content lost in the new IA curriculum, any students who would be finishing the current Algebra 2 (which already covers that content) the year prior would be repeating learning of that content.

If they move that content, instead, to a course between IA 2 and PreCalc, that might cause a slowdown (not as compared to current, but as compared to acceleration possible) for those of high ability coming out of IA2. However, that would allow those finishing Algebra 2 at the same time to continue with PreCalc without the repetition.

MCPS will be taking a blended approach. No learners are getting left out here. This has been covered before.

Where?

It would be good to know that MCPS will be setting things up such that those finishing Algebra 1 / Honors Geometry / Honors Algebra 2 then will be able to take Honors PreCalc, as they currently do, and that that course won't have been altered to introduce already-covered material missing from the new Integrated Algebra curriculum. And that those of high mathematical ability exiting Integrated Algebra 2 at the same time can look forward to a suitably challenging/meaningful course that year as they embark on the Calculus path.

Because, in addition to meeting the needs of a majority or large plurality, that's the kind of thing that "No learners are getting left out here" would tend to mean.

Seriously repeating of concepts )if that happens) is not going to hurt any student. If anything it will reinforce material which seems to already be something that is needed. Let’s not create problems where they don’t exist.

The biggest question that exist is curriculum since most Integrated Maths on the market are 3 years not 2. What missing material needs to be added to PreCal or of its enough for an intermediary Math3 course. And finally what other new courses are going to be classified as eligible for math towards graduation.

Why is math moving to a two year sequence from three?

It's a new statewide MSDE requirement. I think the idea is that kids who aren't going on to calculus don't need the full 3 years of algebra/geometry and should be able to move on to other types of math sooner, and the calc-bound kids can catch up on it after.

What other types of math sooner?

There will be 4 different pathways post-Integrated algebra.:

"i. Quantitative Reasoning pathway develops real-world mathematical skills in
problem-solving, modeling, financial literacy, and data-driven decision-making.

ii. Data and Data Analytics are increasingly essential, and this pathway builds
foundational skills in data analysis, programming, and mathematical reasoning.
It leverages technology to explore real-world datasets and prepare students for
a data-driven future.

iii. Algebraic Foundations of Calculus pathway is designed for students pursuing
STEM fields. It provides a deep exploration of functions and change in
preparation for Calculus.

iv. Statistics and Probability builds students’ understanding of data, uncertainty,
and statistical inference. It focuses on using quantitative research on real-world
phenomena to enhance understanding of relationships in the world around us."

As a non-STEM family, I really love this idea. I had calculus in HS when none of my future plans came anywhere near requiring it. I liked it fine, but I have never used mathematics higher than percentages in my entire professional life. What I _could_ have used and would have benefited greatly from is statistics.

I hope we are seeing in concepts like this the potential for broader thinking about HS curricula. There are many ways to use what mathematics teaches to help students improve the ways they reason about the world, and to support them in preparing for their careers. Right now colleges seem often to anticipate calculus from high-achieving non-STEM high schoolers in order to construe them as having completed rigorous or "most rigorous" coursework. It will probably take some time to shift students' and familiies' views away from that, and some of them may never shift. But I would hate to see a framework like this be limited by an implicit insistence that "A" level students have to take calculus even if they are planning to major in studio art.

I don't think EVERY student NEEDS to take calculus, but you also cannot and should not dismiss the cognitive developmental benefits of learning and studying calculus.

SO MUCH OF HOW THE WORLD WORKS involves calculus in some form or fashion. The algorithms that increasingly power almost every facet of personal and professional life are built on calculus principles.

For kids who go on to pursue STEM majors, it's vital. But those who don't, studying calculus works out your brain in meaningful ways: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-06-07-lack-maths-education-negatively-affects-adolescent-brain-and-cognitive-development

The arguments that kids "don't use algebra or calculus in real life after high school and therefore studying these math subjects is meaningless" is ignorant and wrongheaded. Please do your research and stop repeating such harmful tropes.

Math education is important FOR EVERYONE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the thinking is that a lot of high schoolers don't need geometry, so it's eliminated as a requirement... but it's not going to be offered to kids who do need it as a pre-req to trig/calc/physics?

No one has said it won't be offered to kids on the calc/etc pathway. Just that it is slimmed back in the classes that 100% of students have to take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the thinking is that a lot of high schoolers don't need geometry, so it's eliminated as a requirement... but it's not going to be offered to kids who do need it as a pre-req to trig/calc/physics?

No one has said it won't be offered to kids on the calc/etc pathway. Just that it is slimmed back in the classes that 100% of students have to take.

Is it? Because earlier posters said they don't plan to have an "Integrated Math 3" class. So what is the class?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the thinking is that a lot of high schoolers don't need geometry, so it's eliminated as a requirement... but it's not going to be offered to kids who do need it as a pre-req to trig/calc/physics?

No one has said it won't be offered to kids on the calc/etc pathway. Just that it is slimmed back in the classes that 100% of students have to take.

Is it? Because earlier posters said they don't plan to have an "Integrated Math 3" class. So what is the class?

Who is "they"? It is correct that MSDE is not mandating an integrated algebra 3 for all high school students. But that doesn't mean that MCPS or anywhere else can't implement whatever courses are necessary after integrated algebra for kids on the calc pathway to succeed.

[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:The MSDE (state)-mandated switch to Integrated Algebra 1 will start in the 2027-28 school year for those having completed (or having shown mastery in exceptional cases) the pre-Algebra content that is the on-grade-level expectation for middle school through grade 8. This is whether completeing it under MCPS acceleration (PreAlgebra, the combination of AMP6+ and AMP7+ or Math 8 taken a year early due to prior acceleration in 4/5, 5/6 or otherwise).

Integrated Algebra 2 will follow in 2028-29. For a time, both the new Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 and the current Algebra 1, Geometry and Algebra 2 will be taught, depending on when the student completed pre-Algebra and began one or other sequence. For those taking the new courses, the state assessment will be administered at the end of Integrated Algebra 2.

Those currently in AMP6+ likely will take AMP7+ next year (covering 6th, 7th & 8th grade standards in 2 years), then Integrated Algebra 1 the following year. It is unclear if there will be honors versions of these.

Those currently in PreAlgebra (the current name of the more accelerated course that covers 7th & 8th grade standards in one year) likely will take Algebra 1 next year, followed by Geometry and Algebra 2 (likely honors versions of the latter two; there is no honors version of the current state-mandated Algebra 1 course).

Though completing the overall Algebra sequence at the same time, will be a disconnect between the two groups, as Integrated Algebra will not cover all of the topics that the current sequence does (e.g., Trigonometry). It is unclear how or whether MCPS and other MD county school systems will account for this difference in later courses, whether requiring repetition of content within a new PreCalc for those having taken the current sequence, insertion of a pre-PreCalc course for those having taken the newer sequence, or some other set of options, such as maintaining two versions of PreCalc until all taking the current sequence finish.

1. Thank you for the level of detail and insight. It's more than we've gotten from MCPS!

2. It sounds really complicated and messy to have the concurrent math tracks and classes. How will MCPS staff and register all of that?

Happy to support where I have gotten some insight, myself. (Caveat -- no ex cathedra, here; just another parent.)

I don't know if there are extra state funds associated with managing the change. I expect it likely will be an unfunded mandate that MCPS has to navigate. They've been on it for a little while, though, and there is some time (if barely, given long lead times for curriculum sourcing and the atypical nature of the courses in question) for full policy/planning/training/staff allocation.

I do hope that they don't end up with having the one class forced to repeat learning (especially as they generally have demonstrated affinity for and/or ability related to the subject already) or the other forced to slow-march. I think they can come up with a set of classes that would be flexible to student ability/need into the future, allowing a few extra periods of coverage for about two years to manage both old and new.

There won’t be any “repeat learning.” The few students affected will just be going deeper in the relevant math level.

Your two sentences contradict each other. Either there are students affected by being forced to repeat content or there aren't.

There would be, and they wouldn't be few. If the current forms of PreCalc are not preserved for a year after the new curriculum completes its implementation, but, instead, is altered for all such that it incorporates that content lost in the new IA curriculum, any students who would be finishing the current Algebra 2 (which already covers that content) the year prior would be repeating learning of that content.

If they move that content, instead, to a course between IA 2 and PreCalc, that might cause a slowdown (not as compared to current, but as compared to acceleration possible) for those of high ability coming out of IA2. However, that would allow those finishing Algebra 2 at the same time to continue with PreCalc without the repetition.

MCPS will be taking a blended approach. No learners are getting left out here. This has been covered before.

Where?

It would be good to know that MCPS will be setting things up such that those finishing Algebra 1 / Honors Geometry / Honors Algebra 2 then will be able to take Honors PreCalc, as they currently do, and that that course won't have been altered to introduce already-covered material missing from the new Integrated Algebra curriculum. And that those of high mathematical ability exiting Integrated Algebra 2 at the same time can look forward to a suitably challenging/meaningful course that year as they embark on the Calculus path.

Because, in addition to meeting the needs of a majority or large plurality, that's the kind of thing that "No learners are getting left out here" would tend to mean.

Seriously repeating of concepts )if that happens) is not going to hurt any student. If anything it will reinforce material which seems to already be something that is needed. Let’s not create problems where they don’t exist.

The biggest question that exist is curriculum since most Integrated Maths on the market are 3 years not 2. What missing material needs to be added to PreCal or of its enough for an intermediary Math3 course. And finally what other new courses are going to be classified as eligible for math towards graduation.

Why is math moving to a two year sequence from three?

It's a new statewide MSDE requirement. I think the idea is that kids who aren't going on to calculus don't need the full 3 years of algebra/geometry and should be able to move on to other types of math sooner, and the calc-bound kids can catch up on it after.

What other types of math sooner?

There will be 4 different pathways post-Integrated algebra.:

"i. Quantitative Reasoning pathway develops real-world mathematical skills in
problem-solving, modeling, financial literacy, and data-driven decision-making.

ii. Data and Data Analytics are increasingly essential, and this pathway builds
foundational skills in data analysis, programming, and mathematical reasoning.
It leverages technology to explore real-world datasets and prepare students for
a data-driven future.

iii. Algebraic Foundations of Calculus pathway is designed for students pursuing
STEM fields. It provides a deep exploration of functions and change in
preparation for Calculus.

iv. Statistics and Probability builds students’ understanding of data, uncertainty,
and statistical inference. It focuses on using quantitative research on real-world
phenomena to enhance understanding of relationships in the world around us."

As a non-STEM family, I really love this idea. I had calculus in HS when none of my future plans came anywhere near requiring it. I liked it fine, but I have never used mathematics higher than percentages in my entire professional life. What I _could_ have used and would have benefited greatly from is statistics.

I hope we are seeing in concepts like this the potential for broader thinking about HS curricula. There are many ways to use what mathematics teaches to help students improve the ways they reason about the world, and to support them in preparing for their careers. Right now colleges seem often to anticipate calculus from high-achieving non-STEM high schoolers in order to construe them as having completed rigorous or "most rigorous" coursework. It will probably take some time to shift students' and familiies' views away from that, and some of them may never shift. But I would hate to see a framework like this be limited by an implicit insistence that "A" level students have to take calculus even if they are planning to major in studio art.

I don't think EVERY student NEEDS to take calculus, but you also cannot and should not dismiss the cognitive developmental benefits of learning and studying calculus.

SO MUCH OF HOW THE WORLD WORKS involves calculus in some form or fashion. The algorithms that increasingly power almost every facet of personal and professional life are built on calculus principles.

For kids who go on to pursue STEM majors, it's vital. But those who don't, studying calculus works out your brain in meaningful ways: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-06-07-lack-maths-education-negatively-affects-adolescent-brain-and-cognitive-development

The arguments that kids "don't use algebra or calculus in real life after high school and therefore studying these math subjects is meaningless" is ignorant and wrongheaded. Please do your research and stop repeating such harmful tropes.

Math education is important FOR EVERYONE.

Not the PP, and I don't disagree with you, but I think you might be missing something about how MCPS deals with math when it comes to bright kids who are not STEM-bound.

If you have a bright and capable kid in MCPS, they are tracked into compacted math starting in 4th grade and there is functionally no offramp until 10th grade when they can choose on-level Pre-Calculus, or get ground up in Honors Pre-Calculus.

So, you might argue that they should just not do compacted, but MCPS has created a bifurcated system in which on-level has become remedial. So they can be in remedial math OR get put on an expressway with no exit for another six years. Those are the choices.

So when you tell me that MCPS is now going to also squish three years of Algebraic/Geometric learning into two and somehow even non-STEM kids are going to exit prepared for Calculus, I find it hard to believe because I've been around long enough to know how this district works.

[Anonymous]

Which grade will ve affected and when will that happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Which grade will ve affected and when will that happen?

I think the current 7th grade cohort is the first ones to be impacted.