Is your principal allowing math acceleration and grouping?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that they could improve math by removing some of their arbitrary ceilings. In Montessori, preschoolers and kindergarteners do multiplication not because its advanced but because added one number to itself multiple times naturally relates to coating and skip counting. Its a natural connection to addition and simply understanding sets. They don't ask kids to memorize multiplication tables or even over ally focus on the computation aspect it really is about the concept. This takes the mystery out of math and gives kids the ability to start recognizing patterns and order of operations. MCPS seems to think that this is a concept not allowable until the 3rd grade or perhaps in very simple limited ways at the end of 2nd.

They also should do simple things like add more digits and place values to concepts that they are teaching. Once a child can do double digit addition, there is no reason not to add other place values. The concept is the same and there is value in showing kids that its no big deal to add more numbers. This also helps with kids who do mental calculations easily and don't give a hoot about the multiple strategies for a problem so easy they do it in their heads anyway.

In first grade, there is no reason why they couldn't introduce perimeter or concepts of height/depth/width. My K knows this stuff already and it would make the lessons more interesting than just stopping at naming the shapes and identifying 3 basic properties.

There are many things that they could do to improve the math curriculum but they need to care. I don't think MCPS cares about math.

I agree with you on everything except the last sentence. I think they care. The problem is that most teachers were not good at math themselves and therefore think this stuff is hard. I think they need to treat math as a specialty and pay to have smarter people to teach math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

whether you call it algebra or not, my second grader is doing things in math that I never did in second grade.

Not to be snarky but did you grow up in Appalachia? This stuff is very, very easy. I doubt that my children will become scientists or math experts when they grow up so it matters less to us but it is pretty bad.

I've volunteered in the classrooms and the kids are bored with this stuff. Unless its a game that they can keep playing, most kids finish their work without any real effort and are just bored. Some go back to writing work they didn't finish, some do a few extra "enrichment problems" that are not different, and some just do nothing.

My son had never taken more than 5 minutes to finish his math homework all year. His perspective on math is that its easy and boring. I would like to see the school give them something that warrants at least 30 seconds of thought or gets them to actually think about how they can use these strategies or solve a problem. MCPS really messed up on math.

No Ms. I'll Pretend I am Not Being Snarky, When Really I am, I grew up in Westchester County, NY. And when I was in second grade I was not being given problems like this:
There are 37 students on the playground. Some students left. Now there are 15 students. Compose and solve an equation showing how many kids left the playground.
I was not shown a drawing of an irregular shape cut into four unequal parts and asked - Is this divided into fourths? Explain why or why not

Was I asked what is 37-15 in second grade? Yes. But it was not posed to me in a way that required understanding word problems or composing my own equations. My child does not find it difficult to do those problems, but they are still more challenging than what i learned in second grade, and they introduce concepts that were not introduced in second grade, which was my point in posting. And second graders shouldn't be spending more than 20 minutes on all homework - math facts, spelling review, and any worksheets. So, 5 minutes on the math homework sounds fine. It is not developmentally appropriate to give second graders homework that takes a long time to complete. Cuz ya know what? It is still only second grade. They don't need to be doing trigonometry when they are 8.

And if the entire class is finishing the work so quickly, and the are all as bored as you say, that is a teacher or implementation issue, not a curriculum issue. If the whole class finds it so boring and easy, the whole class should be getting enrichment or acceleration. Are they?
I have heard parents make this math is too easy complaint, and when I ask if their child is getting the enrichment instruction, they ask me "what's that? How would I know?"
A lot of people bitch and moan about the curriculum when their real complaint is about the teacher or school implementation of the curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They also should do simple things like add more digits and place values to concepts that they are teaching. Once a child can do double digit addition, there is no reason not to add other place values. The concept is the same and there is value in showing kids that its no big deal to add more numbers. This also helps with kids who do mental calculations easily and don't give a hoot about the multiple strategies for a problem so easy they do it in their heads anyway.

My kids school does add more digits and place values for the kids getting enriched math instruction. But I have seen parents complain on dcum that adding digits and place values doesn't make things any more challenging for their snowflakes. Basically addition is addition, no matter how many digits, and that simply isn't hard enough for their little geniuses.

[Anonymous]

I see MCPS prettying up C2.0 by giving fancy names to concepts that are, in reality, simple and age appropriate not advanced.

For example, kids in 3rd grade are not really doing "algebra". The "agelbra" my child brings home in third grade is really the idea of triangular math facts disguised as "algebra". When I saw that my son was bringing these home, I checked to see if he understood or was taught the Algebraic ideas -- that an equation can be changed on by doing the same thing to both sides and that one can "solve" the equation by isolating for X. It was Martian talk for him. It is not "algebra" to give a kid a triangular math fact and ask him to substitute in to fill in the blank. (e.g. 10-X=3). Mastering triangular math facts (i.e. knowing all the math facts from 1-10 or 12 in all four operations, addition, subtraction, mulitplication and division) and understanding that they are related (e.g. 10-7 = 3 and 3+7=10) has long been the main work of third grade math. C2.0 isn't doing anything advanced by calling it "Algebra".

Similarly, our school has touted the fact that kids are "learning fractions" now in third grade. Wow! this curriculum must be really advanced! But, if you look carefully at the work, all the kids are learning is how to name a fraction (e.g. that in a picture of a pizza with four slices, each slice is 1/4), and perhaps how to add or subtract a fraction with the same denominator (if Susie eats one slice and Bobby eats two slices, how many slices did they eat?). There is really no discussion of adding or subtracting fractions with different denominators, unless done pictorially. There's also no multiplication or division of fractions. So, really these fraction concepts are not "advanced." Kids can and do learn these concepts earlier, particularly in a Montessori school (which my son attended through kindergarten).

Look behind the curtain, people. The Great Oz is just a little bald man with a bad goatee.

MCPS can get away with this, because most parents are not math literate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see MCPS prettying up C2.0 by giving fancy names to concepts that are, in reality, simple and age appropriate not advanced.

For example, kids in 3rd grade are not really doing "algebra". The "agelbra" my child brings home in third grade is really the idea of triangular math facts disguised as "algebra". When I saw that my son was bringing these home, I checked to see if he understood or was taught the Algebraic ideas -- that an equation can be changed on by doing the same thing to both sides and that one can "solve" the equation by isolating for X. It was Martian talk for him. It is not "algebra" to give a kid a triangular math fact and ask him to substitute in to fill in the blank. (e.g. 10-X=3). Mastering triangular math facts (i.e. knowing all the math facts from 1-10 or 12 in all four operations, addition, subtraction, mulitplication and division) and understanding that they are related (e.g. 10-7 = 3 and 3+7=10) has long been the main work of third grade math. C2.0 isn't doing anything advanced by calling it "Algebra".

Similarly, our school has touted the fact that kids are "learning fractions" now in third grade. Wow! this curriculum must be really advanced! But, if you look carefully at the work, all the kids are learning is how to name a fraction (e.g. that in a picture of a pizza with four slices, each slice is 1/4), and perhaps how to add or subtract a fraction with the same denominator (if Susie eats one slice and Bobby eats two slices, how many slices did they eat?). There is really no discussion of adding or subtracting fractions with different denominators, unless done pictorially. There's also no multiplication or division of fractions. So, really these fraction concepts are not "advanced." Kids can and do learn these concepts earlier, particularly in a Montessori school (which my son attended through kindergarten).

Look behind the curtain, people. The Great Oz is just a little bald man with a bad goatee.

MCPS can get away with this, because most parents are not math literate.

Wait, are you saying that MCPS is actually teaching third grade math to third graders? Let's alert the authorities at once.

[Anonymous]

nd if the entire class is finishing the work so quickly, and the are all as bored as you say, that is a teacher or implementation issue, not a curriculum issue. If the whole class finds it so boring and easy, the whole class should be getting enrichment or acceleration.

I have a friend who teaches in MCPS and she is very frustrated with 2.0 for math. To be fair, there are aspects that she likes for social studies but math is huge problem. You can't lay this on the teachers. They are not allowed to give the entire class enrichment and there is no acceleration. Starr and MCPS is VERY angry that the teacher's union forced more training and more importantly is forcing MCPS to fix the holes in the curriculum that they have been given. The reaction since this went public and they won was to blame everything on teacher implementation.

[Anonymous]

What are the "holes" in he curriculum that need to be "fixed"? I can almost guarantee that those elements did not exist in the previous MCPS curriculum unless you are speaking of summative unit tests in math that all teachers taught to so it made them feel like they were effective teachers when their students did well.

People, including (especially, if you ask me, the union) like to complain about the curriculum because they must have something to bitch about at all times. And I'm a member of that union. I just get so sick of the constant whining. That thread about "who are the biggest martyrs"? The answer is teachers.

[Anonymous]

Mastering triangular math facts (i.e. knowing all the math facts from 1-10 or 12 in all four operations, addition, subtraction, mulitplication and division) and understanding that they are related (e.g. 10-7 = 3 and 3+7=10) has long been the main work of third grade math.

What is so frustrating is that the example that you showed 10-7=3 and 3+7=10, is something that they did 1000 times in first grade and then another 1000 times in 2nd grade. My daughter enjoyed it the first week but they repeat what they do so much she just thinks math is boring now. I'm so sad to hear that next year she will have to do the sam damn thing again in 3rd grade.

The amount of repetition in 2.0 is very inappropriate. They aren't educating our kids. Its just free childcare.

[Anonymous]

People, including (especially, if you ask me, the union) like to complain about the curriculum because they must have something to bitch about at all times.

I'm guessing you are the crazy kid, parent, and teacher hating crazy person from other MD school threads. If you are one of the few the voices in support of MCPS then they have bigger problems than 2.0.

Do you really think that the teacher's union went after 2.0 for holes/incomplete materials and training because they were tired of using their political capitol to go after things like benefits, retirement, working hours, pay, job security, and other working conditions? Sure, we all believe you that teachers have everything they could possibly desire so they decided to go after 2.0 just because they like to bitch. Its really a perfect system and MCPS is never wrong, teachers just went after it for kicks and giggles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see MCPS prettying up C2.0 by giving fancy names to concepts that are, in reality, simple and age appropriate not advanced.

For example, kids in 3rd grade are not really doing "algebra". The "agelbra" my child brings home in third grade is really the idea of triangular math facts disguised as "algebra". When I saw that my son was bringing these home, I checked to see if he understood or was taught the Algebraic ideas -- that an equation can be changed on by doing the same thing to both sides and that one can "solve" the equation by isolating for X. It was Martian talk for him. It is not "algebra" to give a kid a triangular math fact and ask him to substitute in to fill in the blank. (e.g. 10-X=3). Mastering triangular math facts (i.e. knowing all the math facts from 1-10 or 12 in all four operations, addition, subtraction, mulitplication and division) and understanding that they are related (e.g. 10-7 = 3 and 3+7=10) has long been the main work of third grade math. C2.0 isn't doing anything advanced by calling it "Algebra".

Similarly, our school has touted the fact that kids are "learning fractions" now in third grade. Wow! this curriculum must be really advanced! But, if you look carefully at the work, all the kids are learning is how to name a fraction (e.g. that in a picture of a pizza with four slices, each slice is 1/4), and perhaps how to add or subtract a fraction with the same denominator (if Susie eats one slice and Bobby eats two slices, how many slices did they eat?). There is really no discussion of adding or subtracting fractions with different denominators, unless done pictorially. There's also no multiplication or division of fractions. So, really these fraction concepts are not "advanced." Kids can and do learn these concepts earlier, particularly in a Montessori school (which my son attended through kindergarten).

Look behind the curtain, people. The Great Oz is just a little bald man with a bad goatee.

MCPS can get away with this, because most parents are not math literate.

Wait, are you saying that MCPS is actually teaching third grade math to third graders? Let's alert the authorities at once.

No, I'm saying that many third grade kids were doing concepts more advanced than third grade and MCPS pulled them all back to on grade level and tried to pretend that the on grade level was advanced. It's not. It's just regular old third grade math, the same as always.

To be more specific -- at my child's elementary 1/3 of last year's 2nd graders were either one or two years above grade level, meaning as second graders they were either working on the third grade curriculum or the fourth grade curriculum or third with fourth grade extensions. This year all these kids were put into third grade math, where they have spent all year repeating the same things they learned last year. First the school tried to say, "wait, try it, you'll see C2.0 is really 'deeper'". Parents caught on by mid-year when this year's homework looked suspiciously like last year's homework. Parents started angrily asking when "new" material would come. The principal said, "wait, the fractions unit is coming, kids in third grade last year didn't do fractions." But, now parents can see that the fractions unit is really just naming fractions and adding/subtracting with like denominators. These concepts are not "deep."

From where I sit, MCPS has tried and failed to eliminate the achievement gaps by bringing up those at the bottom. So, MCPS is now trying to close the gap by holding back the advancement of kids who have already mastered on grade level skills. MCPS is doing this by eliminating upper level instruction. Without instruction, many kids will not continue to advance and, presto, the achievement gap starts to disappear.

[Anonymous]

Under Math Pathways, the standard was Algebra 1 in 9th grade. Under Curriculum 2.0, the standard is Algebra 1 in 8th grade. How is this not "bringing up those at the bottom"?

I agree that there was a big implementation problem with Curriculum 2.0 with this year's third graders.

[Anonymous]

Regardless of what was written Algebra I in 8 was the norm with the opportunity for accelerated kids to take it in 6 or 7..

[Anonymous]

OK, so, Algebra 1 in 8th grade used to be the norm. And, under C2.0, Algebra 1 in 8th grade will continue to be the norm. How does this show that C2.0 is dumbed down?

And "eliminating upper level instruction" by taking away the option for Algebra 1 in 6th grade (since there is still the option for Algebra 1 in 7th grade) has zero effect on the achievement gap measure "percent of students completing Algebra 1 by 8th grade with at least a C" anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Under Math Pathways, the standard was Algebra 1 in 9th grade. Under Curriculum 2.0, the standard is Algebra 1 in 8th grade. How is this not "bringing up those at the bottom"?

I agree that there was a big implementation problem with Curriculum 2.0 with this year's third graders.

Because many kids were actually doing better than the "standard". Many kids were taking Algebra I in 7th grade and doing well. Now only a select "few" will get to do the compacted 4/5/6 pathway which will get them to Algebra in 7th grade. My older child had this opportunity, but my younger (actually more talented at math) will not.

If you look closely, although Algebra I is the "standard," there will still also be a remedial or lower track on which some kids will not get to Algebra until 9th grade. see http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/math/ and look at fine print under the "courses that lead to college and career readiness" box.

MCPS has already taken many kids off the Algebra I in 7th grade pathway.

MCPS says, that by including all kids together in elementary school in the same classroom, those who were formerly at the bottom will be brought up. But, the pathways MCPS has planned acknowledge that they will not be bringing everyone "up" to Algebra I in 8th grade.

The real question is will MCPS succeed at bringing enough kids up onto the Algebra I in 8th grade pathway (which is really college ready minimum) to justify the number of kids who have been taken off the Algebra I in 7th grade pathway. And, will they use what is likely to be the lower achievement of these Algebra I/7th grade kids to justify that MCPS has "closed the gap"?

Stay tuned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK, so, Algebra 1 in 8th grade used to be the norm. And, under C2.0, Algebra 1 in 8th grade will continue to be the norm. How does this show that C2.0 is dumbed down?

And "eliminating upper level instruction" by taking away the option for Algebra 1 in 6th grade (since there is still the option for Algebra 1 in 7th grade) has zero effect on the achievement gap measure "percent of students completing Algebra 1 by 8th grade with at least a C" anyway.

The number of kids permitted to take Algebra I in 7th grade will be far fewer than before -- MCPS officials have publicly acknowledged this.

There are many different gaps to measure. You are right that the Algebra at 8th grade gap might not be affected, but there is also a gap in high school between those who take more APs and more advanced math and those who don't.