Equitable access to advanced math

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even after the VA secretary of education clearly stated that school districts could continue to define their own classes (incl adv/accel) to meet the needs of their students, as they always have been able to do, RWNJs continued to push the boogeyman narrative.

VDOE told you they weren’t doing it. And it’s not something they could just sneak in there with such an open, public process that requires GA/gov approval.

Totally irrational.

getting tired of RWNJs, and LWNJs like yourself constantly yapping about each other. Why dont you all get in a cage and settle it with a spar?

The post is about equitable access to advanced math. This is what VMPI and similar proposals around the country are aboiut. OP is going the other way and saying minorities need to be placed in even more advanced classes, while most equity proposals involve reducing access for everyone. One of the links on VMPI's website, ""Eliminate tracking systems that sort children based on perceived ability and demographic profile."
Therefore, the goal of detracking will not be realized without working to dismantle the various social, political, and cultural reasons tracking persists. Those that have been privileged by the current system must be willing to
give up that privilege for more equitable schooling."

See the chart at this link to see what VMPI was REALLY about, including:

“Not all college majors need calculus !” (direct quote).

Obviously, calculus can and should be de-emphasized or mostly eliminated, through VMPI.




Here is the source: WTOP:


https://wtop.com/virginia/2021/04/virginia-plans-to-improve-equity-and-learning-opportunities-through-high-school-mathematics/

Only 28% of college majors require calculus ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even after the VA secretary of education clearly stated that school districts could continue to define their own classes (incl adv/accel) to meet the needs of their students, as they always have been able to do, RWNJs continued to push the boogeyman narrative.

VDOE told you they weren’t doing it. And it’s not something they could just sneak in there with such an open, public process that requires GA/gov approval.

Totally irrational.

getting tired of RWNJs, and LWNJs like yourself constantly yapping about each other. Why dont you all get in a cage and settle it with a spar?

The post is about equitable access to advanced math. This is what VMPI and similar proposals around the country are aboiut. OP is going the other way and saying minorities need to be placed in even more advanced classes, while most equity proposals involve reducing access for everyone. One of the links on VMPI's website, ""Eliminate tracking systems that sort children based on perceived ability and demographic profile."
Therefore, the goal of detracking will not be realized without working to dismantle the various social, political, and cultural reasons tracking persists. Those that have been privileged by the current system must be willing to
give up that privilege for more equitable schooling."

See the chart at this link to see what VMPI was REALLY about, including:

“Not all college majors need calculus !” (direct quote).

Obviously, calculus can and should be de-emphasized or mostly eliminated, through VMPI.




Here is the source: WTOP:


https://wtop.com/virginia/2021/04/virginia-plans-to-improve-equity-and-learning-opportunities-through-high-school-mathematics/

Wait - “citizenship” is a necessary math skill ??

It is if you're Jo Boaler or VMPI. Focusing on citizenship means less time is spent on math, so students have an easier time passing math class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even after the VA secretary of education clearly stated that school districts could continue to define their own classes (incl adv/accel) to meet the needs of their students, as they always have been able to do, RWNJs continued to push the boogeyman narrative.

VDOE told you they weren’t doing it. And it’s not something they could just sneak in there with such an open, public process that requires GA/gov approval.

Totally irrational.

getting tired of RWNJs, and LWNJs like yourself constantly yapping about each other. Why dont you all get in a cage and settle it with a spar?

The post is about equitable access to advanced math. This is what VMPI and similar proposals around the country are aboiut. OP is going the other way and saying minorities need to be placed in even more advanced classes, while most equity proposals involve reducing access for everyone. One of the links on VMPI's website, ""Eliminate tracking systems that sort children based on perceived ability and demographic profile."
Therefore, the goal of detracking will not be realized without working to dismantle the various social, political, and cultural reasons tracking persists. Those that have been privileged by the current system must be willing to
give up that privilege for more equitable schooling."

See the chart at this link to see what VMPI was REALLY about, including:

“Not all college majors need calculus !” (direct quote).

Obviously, calculus can and should be de-emphasized or mostly eliminated, through VMPI.




Here is the source: WTOP:


https://wtop.com/virginia/2021/04/virginia-plans-to-improve-equity-and-learning-opportunities-through-high-school-mathematics/

Wait - “citizenship” is a necessary math skill ??

It is if you're Jo Boaler or VMPI. Focusing on citizenship means less time is spent on math, so students have an easier time passing math class.

It means don’t be a dick and make up lies for political purposes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They wanted to ADD options that are more relevant for non-STEM majors. They weren’t eliminating calculus.

Ah yes, 'Someone who wants to be a beautician can take logic and sets."

They were eliminating calculus for the vast majority of kids who would be taking calculus without any changes. All those kids who take honors classes with a handful of AP classes.

Where is "Logic and Sets" on that page?

What is wrong with letting kids take a more useful and interesting (form them) math class than calculus?

Why is the "liberty and freedom" crew so opposed to student/parent choice?

That quote about Logic and Sets was from one of the seminars explaining the new classes.
There is nothing wrong with having other classes, and certainly precalculus/algebra 2 does not have to be forced on all students.
It is wrong to set up the courses so that your typical honors student would be unable to take calculus.
Extra classes not a big deal. Having algebra in 9th grade removes the path to calculus in high school.
Many places are accelerated a year past that for large cohort of students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Wait - “citizenship” is a necessary math skill ??
It is if you're Jo Boaler or VMPI. Focusing on citizenship means less time is spent on math, so students have an easier time passing math class.

It means don’t be a dick and make up lies for political purposes.

I looked up calculus curriculum at a school in California a few years ago. It might have been the Stand and Deliver school or one of the Railside schools in Jo Boaler's paper.
Not only were they way behind. still covering derivatives in February, but they had extra credit-
"Pick your favorite female or minority inventor, write an essay..."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
why public push-back was so strong from all parts of the political spectrum.

According to the booster, this is all speculation and the public pushback was unwarranted, recommendation is not requirement, and public pushback would have prevented the recommendations from happening.

Oh and the booster supports the recommendations that were being made, including eliminating tracking through middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Calculus could always be offered. You can offer any course. The key question is whether students are prepared to do well in a course. By watering down content to only big ideas in VMPI's Grade 8-10 courses, most Algebra 2 and Precalculus content would have been compacted into one year. This would have undermined students' preparation for calculus.

They have pre-calculus broken out as a separate class.

And these are just examples, each school district would continue to define their own course offerings as they do today.

Today, there isn’t even a VA standard for precalculus and yet many districts offer it. The standards are the minimum skills that should be taught; they aren’t limiting.

VMPI offered a one semester course on Trig and a one semester course Pre-Calculus: Focus on Functions that were to be taken the same year. That is where nearly all of Algebra 2 content (with its functions emphasis) would have been housed. In that regard, it would have been like San Francisco's compacted Algebra 2 and Precalculus course that failed so many kids.

In practice, VMPI's Grade 8-10 courses would have covered pared-down Prealgebra, Algebra 1, and Geometry content plus data analysis content, with just a pinch of Algebra 2 thrown in so they could claim Algebra 2 was included.

That all needed to be hashed out and reviewed. They never had the chance to put out a proposal so you’re speculating.

No, they had laid it out internally. Which is why they knew to specify in their Infographic that Grades 8-10 courses would only generate two high school credits, consistent with covering only Prealgebra, Algebra 1 and Geometry. If Algebra 2 had been included as well, Grades 8-10 courses would have generated three high school credits.

As an example. Pre-VMPI, a student taking 8th grade Algebra 1 would have earned three high school credits by 10th grade (Algebra 1, Geometry, Algebra 2). But under VMPI, they would only have two high school credits by 10th grade. Thus, rigor and content was being reducing for advanced kids. And even the two high school credits earned in VMPI's Grades 8-10 was generous. VMPI was only going to include big ideas in Grades 8-10 that were relevant to all students; content only needed by some students was to be dropped, thus pushing the bar down to the lowest common denominator. Data literacy was to be added in Grades 8-10 courses but while learning how to use spreadsheets is useful, it's not mathematically rigorous.

Thus, advanced students would have gotten hit with a double whammy under VMPI - fewer high school credits by 10th grade and less rigorous content underpinning the two high school credits they would have earned by 10th grade. That is why public push-back was so strong from all parts of the political spectrum.

And instead of having a rational discussion like adults, people pushed misinformation and got all hysterical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
why public push-back was so strong from all parts of the political spectrum.

According to the booster, this is all speculation and the public pushback was unwarranted, recommendation is not requirement, and public pushback would have prevented the recommendations from happening.

Oh and the booster supports the recommendations that were being made, including eliminating tracking through middle school.

The extreme hysteria and misinformation were unwarranted.

I support advanced/accelerated math options in MS. ??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They wanted to ADD options that are more relevant for non-STEM majors. They weren’t eliminating calculus.

Ah yes, 'Someone who wants to be a beautician can take logic and sets."

They were eliminating calculus for the vast majority of kids who would be taking calculus without any changes. All those kids who take honors classes with a handful of AP classes.

Where is "Logic and Sets" on that page?

What is wrong with letting kids take a more useful and interesting (form them) math class than calculus?

Why is the "liberty and freedom" crew so opposed to student/parent choice?

That quote about Logic and Sets was from one of the seminars explaining the new classes.
There is nothing wrong with having other classes, and certainly precalculus/algebra 2 does not have to be forced on all students.
It is wrong to set up the courses so that your typical honors student would be unable to take calculus.
Extra classes not a big deal. Having algebra in 9th grade removes the path to calculus in high school.
Many places are accelerated a year past that for large cohort of students.

And they could have continued doing that.

Today the standard for 8th grade is math 8, but many schools cover that material in earlier, accelerated classes. At no point did they say schools districts couldn’t continue to do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They wanted to ADD options that are more relevant for non-STEM majors. They weren’t eliminating calculus.

Ah yes, 'Someone who wants to be a beautician can take logic and sets."

They were eliminating calculus for the vast majority of kids who would be taking calculus without any changes. All those kids who take honors classes with a handful of AP classes.

Where is "Logic and Sets" on that page?

What is wrong with letting kids take a more useful and interesting (form them) math class than calculus?

Why is the "liberty and freedom" crew so opposed to student/parent choice?

That quote about Logic and Sets was from one of the seminars explaining the new classes.
There is nothing wrong with having other classes, and certainly precalculus/algebra 2 does not have to be forced on all students.
It is wrong to set up the courses so that your typical honors student would be unable to take calculus.
Extra classes not a big deal. Having algebra in 9th grade removes the path to calculus in high school.
Many places are accelerated a year past that for large cohort of students.

And they could have continued doing that.

Today the standard for 8th grade is math 8, but many schools cover that material in earlier, accelerated classes. At no point did they say schools districts couldn’t continue to do that.

Initially, VMPI said that students would be in heterogenous classes. This was a critical part of VMPI's construction. Why? VMPI wanted to find ways to engage students who don't like math and concluded that the best way to do that was to make "authentic" connections to real life in math class. Heterogenous classes facilitated that because all students in Grade 8, for example, would be taking the same English, history, science course and content connections could be made easily across a grade's coursework.

Given the public push-back, VMPI dropped the call for heterogenous classes but nonetheless kept calling for content connections even though students would no longer share the same coursework beyond math. Making content connections would be harder without heterogenous classes but VMPI never explained how they would navigate this inconsistency in their revised plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even after the VA secretary of education clearly stated that school districts could continue to define their own classes (incl adv/accel) to meet the needs of their students, as they always have been able to do, RWNJs continued to push the boogeyman narrative.

VDOE told you they weren’t doing it. And it’s not something they could just sneak in there with such an open, public process that requires GA/gov approval.

Totally irrational.

getting tired of RWNJs, and LWNJs like yourself constantly yapping about each other. Why dont you all get in a cage and settle it with a spar?

The post is about equitable access to advanced math. This is what VMPI and similar proposals around the country are aboiut. OP is going the other way and saying minorities need to be placed in even more advanced classes, while most equity proposals involve reducing access for everyone. One of the links on VMPI's website, ""Eliminate tracking systems that sort children based on perceived ability and demographic profile."
Therefore, the goal of detracking will not be realized without working to dismantle the various social, political, and cultural reasons tracking persists. Those that have been privileged by the current system must be willing to
give up that privilege for more equitable schooling."

See the chart at this link to see what VMPI was REALLY about, including:

“Not all college majors need calculus !” (direct quote).

Obviously, calculus can and should be de-emphasized or mostly eliminated, through VMPI.




Here is the source: WTOP:


https://wtop.com/virginia/2021/04/virginia-plans-to-improve-equity-and-learning-opportunities-through-high-school-mathematics/

They wanted to ADD options that are more relevant for non-STEM majors. They weren’t eliminating calculus.

I am pretty sure that most schools had the classes that were being added.

What they were doing was blending courses, so there wouldn't be Algebra and Geometry but whatever they were calling the class. I guess Essential Math 1 and 2.

Nothing in their graphic explained that Essential Math 1 and 2 where this blended Algebra Geometry concept, which was confusing. I remember watching a video where the students spent a good amount of time complaining about how hard Tri, Precalculus and Calculus were. Then they had FCPS Alumni who were in college talking about how they never used those classes and how those classes had been a waste of time. All to introduce these "new" math classes that were more practical. All of which ignored that there were already stats classes and classes that were meant to be more practical math usage.

They were also removing the Advanced Math option in ES and the ability to take the grade 9 and 10 math, traditionally Algebra and Geometry, in 7th and 8th grade.

Essentially, they did a crap job of explaining that Algebra and Geometry were still being taught, just in a different manner. The videos I saw sure made it sound like the approach was being taken because 1) math was hard 2) higher level math was useless. Finally, they were clearly eliminating the Advanced Math path in ES which meant that kids who were already bored in Advanced Math would be even more bored in the new program.

I remember looking over the material that they had on the website, watching the videos they posted, and being shocked enough at how it was being presented that I wrote to all the candidates and said that I would not vote for anyone supporting this change. They did a lousey job with their marketing.

Thanks, PP, for this summary, and it’s generally what I recall as well.

When the VMPI advocates were claiming nothing was being taken away, lots of things were being added, and it was only about access, it all sounded impossible.

And it was. Hidden in the details were clear plans to eliminate calculus for nearly all students, with a vague promise the might be a “potential pathway,” but no promises and not for most students.

I also recall VMPI would have delayed Algebra for nearly all student subjects until 9th grade, but when challenged, the VMPI advocates again made vague promises about “potential pathways could exist” or how “an individual school could be potentially be allowed the possibility of maintaining different classes.”

VMPI was presented in the most misleading and deceitful way possible at the time. Hope it never comes back, as it was clearly a deeply flawed plan.

All false. Stop spreading misinformation.

Nope. Earlier PP is right. They wanted to basically not have any advancement in math until 11th. If you listened to their webinars this was clear - all kids doing the same math classes for K-10 was a major part of VMPI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They wanted to ADD options that are more relevant for non-STEM majors. They weren’t eliminating calculus.

Ah yes, 'Someone who wants to be a beautician can take logic and sets."

They were eliminating calculus for the vast majority of kids who would be taking calculus without any changes. All those kids who take honors classes with a handful of AP classes.

Where is "Logic and Sets" on that page?

What is wrong with letting kids take a more useful and interesting (form them) math class than calculus?

Why is the "liberty and freedom" crew so opposed to student/parent choice?

That quote about Logic and Sets was from one of the seminars explaining the new classes.
There is nothing wrong with having other classes, and certainly precalculus/algebra 2 does not have to be forced on all students.
It is wrong to set up the courses so that your typical honors student would be unable to take calculus.
Extra classes not a big deal. Having algebra in 9th grade removes the path to calculus in high school.
Many places are accelerated a year past that for large cohort of students.

Algebra 2 is interesting. It's just algebra, right? Algebra with higher powers and complex numbers.
A quick clever kid could get it, while a slower kid might need another year around the sun to make sense of it.

Its not like putting a French course and a Chinese course in the same room.

Maybe you could put all the kids through the same "HS math 1 and 2" and the quick clever ones pass algebra 2 skills and are ready for pre calc but the slower ones only pass algebra 1 and are ready for the less STEMy quantitative courses. And the poster above still allows jumping up a step on the ladder.
It's a bit of a needle to thread, and one can debate if it will work, but it's not insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even after the VA secretary of education clearly stated that school districts could continue to define their own classes (incl adv/accel) to meet the needs of their students, as they always have been able to do, RWNJs continued to push the boogeyman narrative.

VDOE told you they weren’t doing it. And it’s not something they could just sneak in there with such an open, public process that requires GA/gov approval.

Totally irrational.

getting tired of RWNJs, and LWNJs like yourself constantly yapping about each other. Why dont you all get in a cage and settle it with a spar?

The post is about equitable access to advanced math. This is what VMPI and similar proposals around the country are aboiut. OP is going the other way and saying minorities need to be placed in even more advanced classes, while most equity proposals involve reducing access for everyone. One of the links on VMPI's website, ""Eliminate tracking systems that sort children based on perceived ability and demographic profile."
Therefore, the goal of detracking will not be realized without working to dismantle the various social, political, and cultural reasons tracking persists. Those that have been privileged by the current system must be willing to
give up that privilege for more equitable schooling."

See the chart at this link to see what VMPI was REALLY about, including:

“Not all college majors need calculus !” (direct quote).

Obviously, calculus can and should be de-emphasized or mostly eliminated, through VMPI.




Here is the source: WTOP:


https://wtop.com/virginia/2021/04/virginia-plans-to-improve-equity-and-learning-opportunities-through-high-school-mathematics/

They wanted to ADD options that are more relevant for non-STEM majors. They weren’t eliminating calculus.

I am pretty sure that most schools had the classes that were being added.

What they were doing was blending courses, so there wouldn't be Algebra and Geometry but whatever they were calling the class. I guess Essential Math 1 and 2.

Nothing in their graphic explained that Essential Math 1 and 2 where this blended Algebra Geometry concept, which was confusing. I remember watching a video where the students spent a good amount of time complaining about how hard Tri, Precalculus and Calculus were. Then they had FCPS Alumni who were in college talking about how they never used those classes and how those classes had been a waste of time. All to introduce these "new" math classes that were more practical. All of which ignored that there were already stats classes and classes that were meant to be more practical math usage.

They were also removing the Advanced Math option in ES and the ability to take the grade 9 and 10 math, traditionally Algebra and Geometry, in 7th and 8th grade.

Essentially, they did a crap job of explaining that Algebra and Geometry were still being taught, just in a different manner. The videos I saw sure made it sound like the approach was being taken because 1) math was hard 2) higher level math was useless. Finally, they were clearly eliminating the Advanced Math path in ES which meant that kids who were already bored in Advanced Math would be even more bored in the new program.

I remember looking over the material that they had on the website, watching the videos they posted, and being shocked enough at how it was being presented that I wrote to all the candidates and said that I would not vote for anyone supporting this change. They did a lousey job with their marketing.

Thanks, PP, for this summary, and it’s generally what I recall as well.

When the VMPI advocates were claiming nothing was being taken away, lots of things were being added, and it was only about access, it all sounded impossible.

And it was. Hidden in the details were clear plans to eliminate calculus for nearly all students, with a vague promise the might be a “potential pathway,” but no promises and not for most students.

I also recall VMPI would have delayed Algebra for nearly all student subjects until 9th grade, but when challenged, the VMPI advocates again made vague promises about “potential pathways could exist” or how “an individual school could be potentially be allowed the possibility of maintaining different classes.”

VMPI was presented in the most misleading and deceitful way possible at the time. Hope it never comes back, as it was clearly a deeply flawed plan.

All false. Stop spreading misinformation.

Nope. Earlier PP is right. They wanted to basically not have any advancement in math until 11th. If you listened to their webinars this was clear - all kids doing the same math classes for K-10 was a major part of VMPI.

How would a student get to Multivariable in junior or senior year, if no accelaration was allowed until 10th? On the other end, is it not unfair for students to be dragged into unnecessary math when all they want to study is Algebra 2 for HS graduation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even after the VA secretary of education clearly stated that school districts could continue to define their own classes (incl adv/accel) to meet the needs of their students, as they always have been able to do, RWNJs continued to push the boogeyman narrative.

VDOE told you they weren’t doing it. And it’s not something they could just sneak in there with such an open, public process that requires GA/gov approval.

Totally irrational.

getting tired of RWNJs, and LWNJs like yourself constantly yapping about each other. Why dont you all get in a cage and settle it with a spar?

The post is about equitable access to advanced math. This is what VMPI and similar proposals around the country are aboiut. OP is going the other way and saying minorities need to be placed in even more advanced classes, while most equity proposals involve reducing access for everyone. One of the links on VMPI's website, ""Eliminate tracking systems that sort children based on perceived ability and demographic profile."
Therefore, the goal of detracking will not be realized without working to dismantle the various social, political, and cultural reasons tracking persists. Those that have been privileged by the current system must be willing to
give up that privilege for more equitable schooling."

See the chart at this link to see what VMPI was REALLY about, including:

“Not all college majors need calculus !” (direct quote).

Obviously, calculus can and should be de-emphasized or mostly eliminated, through VMPI.




Here is the source: WTOP:


https://wtop.com/virginia/2021/04/virginia-plans-to-improve-equity-and-learning-opportunities-through-high-school-mathematics/

They wanted to ADD options that are more relevant for non-STEM majors. They weren’t eliminating calculus.

I am pretty sure that most schools had the classes that were being added.

What they were doing was blending courses, so there wouldn't be Algebra and Geometry but whatever they were calling the class. I guess Essential Math 1 and 2.

Nothing in their graphic explained that Essential Math 1 and 2 where this blended Algebra Geometry concept, which was confusing. I remember watching a video where the students spent a good amount of time complaining about how hard Tri, Precalculus and Calculus were. Then they had FCPS Alumni who were in college talking about how they never used those classes and how those classes had been a waste of time. All to introduce these "new" math classes that were more practical. All of which ignored that there were already stats classes and classes that were meant to be more practical math usage.

They were also removing the Advanced Math option in ES and the ability to take the grade 9 and 10 math, traditionally Algebra and Geometry, in 7th and 8th grade.

Essentially, they did a crap job of explaining that Algebra and Geometry were still being taught, just in a different manner. The videos I saw sure made it sound like the approach was being taken because 1) math was hard 2) higher level math was useless. Finally, they were clearly eliminating the Advanced Math path in ES which meant that kids who were already bored in Advanced Math would be even more bored in the new program.

I remember looking over the material that they had on the website, watching the videos they posted, and being shocked enough at how it was being presented that I wrote to all the candidates and said that I would not vote for anyone supporting this change. They did a lousey job with their marketing.

Thanks, PP, for this summary, and it’s generally what I recall as well.

When the VMPI advocates were claiming nothing was being taken away, lots of things were being added, and it was only about access, it all sounded impossible.

And it was. Hidden in the details were clear plans to eliminate calculus for nearly all students, with a vague promise the might be a “potential pathway,” but no promises and not for most students.

I also recall VMPI would have delayed Algebra for nearly all student subjects until 9th grade, but when challenged, the VMPI advocates again made vague promises about “potential pathways could exist” or how “an individual school could be potentially be allowed the possibility of maintaining different classes.”

VMPI was presented in the most misleading and deceitful way possible at the time. Hope it never comes back, as it was clearly a deeply flawed plan.

All false. Stop spreading misinformation.

Nope. Earlier PP is right. They wanted to basically not have any advancement in math until 11th. If you listened to their webinars this was clear - all kids doing the same math classes for K-10 was a major part of VMPI.

So major that they forgot to include it in the infographic? No. It was a topic for discussion but wasn’t a major component like integrated math and expanding math options.

They always included AP and IB, which requires 8th grade algebra 1.

Anyway, let’s say there was some great conspiracy to sneak it in. It’s not like they could have gotten it past public reviews and GA/governor approval if it were unpopular.

So much faux hysteria.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even after the VA secretary of education clearly stated that school districts could continue to define their own classes (incl adv/accel) to meet the needs of their students, as they always have been able to do, RWNJs continued to push the boogeyman narrative.

VDOE told you they weren’t doing it. And it’s not something they could just sneak in there with such an open, public process that requires GA/gov approval.

Totally irrational.

getting tired of RWNJs, and LWNJs like yourself constantly yapping about each other. Why dont you all get in a cage and settle it with a spar?

The post is about equitable access to advanced math. This is what VMPI and similar proposals around the country are aboiut. OP is going the other way and saying minorities need to be placed in even more advanced classes, while most equity proposals involve reducing access for everyone. One of the links on VMPI's website, ""Eliminate tracking systems that sort children based on perceived ability and demographic profile."
Therefore, the goal of detracking will not be realized without working to dismantle the various social, political, and cultural reasons tracking persists. Those that have been privileged by the current system must be willing to
give up that privilege for more equitable schooling."

See the chart at this link to see what VMPI was REALLY about, including:

“Not all college majors need calculus !” (direct quote).

Obviously, calculus can and should be de-emphasized or mostly eliminated, through VMPI.




Here is the source: WTOP:


https://wtop.com/virginia/2021/04/virginia-plans-to-improve-equity-and-learning-opportunities-through-high-school-mathematics/

Only 28% of college majors require calculus ?

You don't need to know Calculus to be a doctor or a lawyer!