Williamsburg Pre-Algebra, 931?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow you folks are obsessed. Summer hasn’t even started yet

I was one of the people who asked last year – it’s annoying that there are no *announced* guidelines or policies. I asked at our elementary last year and got a totally BS answer that I knew was incorrect (they’ll evaluate kids at the beginning of the school year and decide where to place them in the first month or so of school), and when I tried to clarify, was shut down with “most kids don’t benefit from accelerated math and it’s highly inappropriate to parent place.”

Just announce the process/guidelines and that will cut down on a significant amount of speculation.

100% this. Although the website says parents will be notified in late June/early July. They do evaluate kids at the beginning of the school year though.


I bet they don't publish anything because it is not a fixed line. I also bet the scores for placement vary depending on the school. Especially if pp is correct and higher scores are based on outside tutoring/help. S. Arlington/lower income schools are less likely to have that help and there is still a pre-algebra class at these schools. I know for a fact that at our school we had no kids score as high as some of the numbers being through around here, but our MS still has a pre-algebra class. Especially when you add in the Spanish schools which may have a different space due to language (especially when kids are more behind these past couple years due to covid).

That makes sense. There may be some kids who can score highly on the test but not meet other readiness markers like attendance or study skills/work ethic. Automatically placing them would be a disservice

That might apply to some kids but in general, if a kid is scoring above the SOL/MI threshold for acceleration, it's unlikely they have issues with attendance. Scoring high on a test of knowledge (not aptitude) requires a kid to have worked with the material consistently.
A better approach is follow a PP's advice and do what FCPS does. Offer kids more challenging math material in ES so that all kids have the opportunity to accelerate in school. Then more kids would be able to meet the thresholds. Failing to offer more challenging material is ES will lead families that are able to seek enrichment outside of school, which will lead to widening gaps in the number of kids meeting accelerated math thresholds according to the SES level of the MS.

Our schools (one SA, one option) both provided opportunities for enrichment/acceleration.

Enrichment is not acceleration. Our SA ES was very clear that enrichment is fine but nothing above grade level was allowed. They can only go deeper, not faster/higher. Kids in a school with that approach who aren’t learning on their own or from a parent/tutor/outside vendor outside of school hours are NOT going to meet the score threshold. The economic/ethnic makeup of the accelerated class at our MS bears this out. APS is doing equity wrong and it pisses me off. It’s widening gaps, not closing them!

I am one of the previous PPs and agree completely. I am kicking around the idea of showing up to the school board with this argument next year. For my 2e child who thrives with math, enrichment does Jack shit and acceleration is exactly what they need. I accelerate at home - and that child thrives with respect to confidence. The school is being lazy by hiding behind “enrichment”. The enrichment is a complete waste of time.

Feel free to come to board meetings with me…I keep debating it with myself. But this - holding kids back in the name of equity - is simply wrong.

I am PP, and have a couple points of clarification. The school isn’t being lazy. It’s a mandate coming down from Central Office. Individual schools and teachers sometimes ignore or find discreet ways around this idiotic mandate, but really, don’t be mad at teachers who are just trying to follow the rules and not get into trouble with their administrators or the district. Second, do NOT go complain about how your precious DC is being held back. Might be true, but they’ll immediately dismiss your concerns as that of an over-involved helicopter Karen. Instead, point out that kids who don’t have the resources outside of school are being sidelined before they ever get to MS, because that’s the really sad part and the part they should want to fix. You and I can work around them. Not very many kids or parents from less privileged homes will get over the barriers they’ve built.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow you folks are obsessed. Summer hasn’t even started yet

I was one of the people who asked last year – it’s annoying that there are no *announced* guidelines or policies. I asked at our elementary last year and got a totally BS answer that I knew was incorrect (they’ll evaluate kids at the beginning of the school year and decide where to place them in the first month or so of school), and when I tried to clarify, was shut down with “most kids don’t benefit from accelerated math and it’s highly inappropriate to parent place.”

Just announce the process/guidelines and that will cut down on a significant amount of speculation.

100% this. Although the website says parents will be notified in late June/early July. They do evaluate kids at the beginning of the school year though.


I bet they don't publish anything because it is not a fixed line. I also bet the scores for placement vary depending on the school. Especially if pp is correct and higher scores are based on outside tutoring/help. S. Arlington/lower income schools are less likely to have that help and there is still a pre-algebra class at these schools. I know for a fact that at our school we had no kids score as high as some of the numbers being through around here, but our MS still has a pre-algebra class. Especially when you add in the Spanish schools which may have a different space due to language (especially when kids are more behind these past couple years due to covid).

That makes sense. There may be some kids who can score highly on the test but not meet other readiness markers like attendance or study skills/work ethic. Automatically placing them would be a disservice

That might apply to some kids but in general, if a kid is scoring above the SOL/MI threshold for acceleration, it's unlikely they have issues with attendance. Scoring high on a test of knowledge (not aptitude) requires a kid to have worked with the material consistently.
A better approach is follow a PP's advice and do what FCPS does. Offer kids more challenging math material in ES so that all kids have the opportunity to accelerate in school. Then more kids would be able to meet the thresholds. Failing to offer more challenging material is ES will lead families that are able to seek enrichment outside of school, which will lead to widening gaps in the number of kids meeting accelerated math thresholds according to the SES level of the MS.

Our schools (one SA, one option) both provided opportunities for enrichment/acceleration.

Enrichment is not acceleration. Our SA ES was very clear that enrichment is fine but nothing above grade level was allowed. They can only go deeper, not faster/higher. Kids in a school with that approach who aren’t learning on their own or from a parent/tutor/outside vendor outside of school hours are NOT going to meet the score threshold. The economic/ethnic makeup of the accelerated class at our MS bears this out. APS is doing equity wrong and it pisses me off. It’s widening gaps, not closing them!

I am one of the previous PPs and agree completely. I am kicking around the idea of showing up to the school board with this argument next year. For my 2e child who thrives with math, enrichment does Jack shit and acceleration is exactly what they need. I accelerate at home - and that child thrives with respect to confidence. The school is being lazy by hiding behind “enrichment”. The enrichment is a complete waste of time.

Feel free to come to board meetings with me…I keep debating it with myself. But this - holding kids back in the name of equity - is simply wrong.

Yuk, the "deeper but not higher" myth raises its ugly head again.

I hope that those perpetrating it are not in a position to determine our children's math education - but to the extent that they are, they should remember that they will be fought every step of the way. (Recall VMPI and the political shifts to which it led.)

"Grade level" math is fundamentally incompatible with engaging mathematically talented children. To pick one of many examples: in VA, grade level standards do not introduce simple variables until 5th grade. No x, no y, no z. Good luck going "deeper" without variables. Actually, good luck even teaching your children the way you were taught in 2nd or 3rd grade 30 years ago when variables weren't taboo. Or, take another example: negative numbers - they're reserved for 5th graders also - mathematicians can only laugh at the idea of "going deeper" without them. Yet, we have to discuss with elementary school teachers why it's ok for our 3rd grader to be fluent in them.

In actuality, there's no notion of "going deeper but not higher." Advanced children will discover the need for, and inquire about concepts that are 2-4 years ahead of what the school establishment considers "grade level." It is the duty of a teacher to respect this fact and support and teach those students no matter their actual grade or age. It is our responsibility as citizens to fight ideologues who (sometimes in the name of so-called "equity") want to hold our children back so that they conform to their notions.

Wait, they introduce variables earlier than 5th. I mean I have seen my 2nd grader get problems like 5+x=10. I mean sure it is very basic, but still there.

[Anonymous]

I’m a 5th grade VA teacher. Negative numbers are not a 5th grade concept, they are taught in 6th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a 5th grade VA teacher. Negative numbers are not a 5th grade concept, they are taught in 6th.

Then the 3rd grade teacher who told us that was mistaken. (Like many parents, we've tried meeting at the beginning of each year with public school teachers to ask them for support for our child.) Also, truth be told, the 3rd grade teacher was a bit of an aberration (and was probably scared of negative numbers herself). For us, a slight majority of teachers was actually not opposed to our child using negative numbers, even though they would give otherwise very limited support. A positive example was the 4th grade teacher who invited our child to do the now unfortunately defunct Lure of the Labyrinth, which they had a lot of fun completing.

Anonymous wrote:Wait, they introduce variables earlier than 5th. I mean I have seen my 2nd grader get problems like 5+x=10. I mean sure it is very basic, but still there.

I was referring to the Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL) which - generally - describe "grade level" standards. The 5th grade requirements state: "Students will be introduced to expressions with a variable." and in fact I have not found the word "variable" in the SOL for 4th grade or below. I'd be happy to be proven wrong. If your 2nd grader uses variables someone is not going deep but high or whatever the contorted statement is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow you folks are obsessed. Summer hasn’t even started yet

I was one of the people who asked last year – it’s annoying that there are no *announced* guidelines or policies. I asked at our elementary last year and got a totally BS answer that I knew was incorrect (they’ll evaluate kids at the beginning of the school year and decide where to place them in the first month or so of school), and when I tried to clarify, was shut down with “most kids don’t benefit from accelerated math and it’s highly inappropriate to parent place.”

Just announce the process/guidelines and that will cut down on a significant amount of speculation.

100% this. Although the website says parents will be notified in late June/early July. They do evaluate kids at the beginning of the school year though.


I bet they don't publish anything because it is not a fixed line. I also bet the scores for placement vary depending on the school. Especially if pp is correct and higher scores are based on outside tutoring/help. S. Arlington/lower income schools are less likely to have that help and there is still a pre-algebra class at these schools. I know for a fact that at our school we had no kids score as high as some of the numbers being through around here, but our MS still has a pre-algebra class. Especially when you add in the Spanish schools which may have a different space due to language (especially when kids are more behind these past couple years due to covid).

That makes sense. There may be some kids who can score highly on the test but not meet other readiness markers like attendance or study skills/work ethic. Automatically placing them would be a disservice

That might apply to some kids but in general, if a kid is scoring above the SOL/MI threshold for acceleration, it's unlikely they have issues with attendance. Scoring high on a test of knowledge (not aptitude) requires a kid to have worked with the material consistently.
A better approach is follow a PP's advice and do what FCPS does. Offer kids more challenging math material in ES so that all kids have the opportunity to accelerate in school. Then more kids would be able to meet the thresholds. Failing to offer more challenging material is ES will lead families that are able to seek enrichment outside of school, which will lead to widening gaps in the number of kids meeting accelerated math thresholds according to the SES level of the MS.

Our schools (one SA, one option) both provided opportunities for enrichment/acceleration.

Enrichment is not acceleration. Our SA ES was very clear that enrichment is fine but nothing above grade level was allowed. They can only go deeper, not faster/higher. Kids in a school with that approach who aren’t learning on their own or from a parent/tutor/outside vendor outside of school hours are NOT going to meet the score threshold. The economic/ethnic makeup of the accelerated class at our MS bears this out. APS is doing equity wrong and it pisses me off. It’s widening gaps, not closing them!

I am one of the previous PPs and agree completely. I am kicking around the idea of showing up to the school board with this argument next year. For my 2e child who thrives with math, enrichment does Jack shit and acceleration is exactly what they need. I accelerate at home - and that child thrives with respect to confidence. The school is being lazy by hiding behind “enrichment”. The enrichment is a complete waste of time.

Feel free to come to board meetings with me…I keep debating it with myself. But this - holding kids back in the name of equity - is simply wrong.

Yuk, the "deeper but not higher" myth raises its ugly head again.

I hope that those perpetrating it are not in a position to determine our children's math education - but to the extent that they are, they should remember that they will be fought every step of the way. (Recall VMPI and the political shifts to which it led.)

"Grade level" math is fundamentally incompatible with engaging mathematically talented children. To pick one of many examples: in VA, grade level standards do not introduce simple variables until 5th grade. No x, no y, no z. Good luck going "deeper" without variables. Actually, good luck even teaching your children the way you were taught in 2nd or 3rd grade 30 years ago when variables weren't taboo. Or, take another example: negative numbers - they're reserved for 5th graders also - mathematicians can only laugh at the idea of "going deeper" without them. Yet, we have to discuss with elementary school teachers why it's ok for our 3rd grader to be fluent in them.

In actuality, there's no notion of "going deeper but not higher." Advanced children will discover the need for, and inquire about concepts that are 2-4 years ahead of what the school establishment considers "grade level." It is the duty of a teacher to respect this fact and support and teach those students no matter their actual grade or age. It is our responsibility as citizens to fight ideologues who (sometimes in the name of so-called "equity") want to hold our children back so that they conform to their notions.

Republicans lying and distorting the truth to push for votes? Yes, it's hard to forget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow you folks are obsessed. Summer hasn’t even started yet

I was one of the people who asked last year – it’s annoying that there are no *announced* guidelines or policies. I asked at our elementary last year and got a totally BS answer that I knew was incorrect (they’ll evaluate kids at the beginning of the school year and decide where to place them in the first month or so of school), and when I tried to clarify, was shut down with “most kids don’t benefit from accelerated math and it’s highly inappropriate to parent place.”

Just announce the process/guidelines and that will cut down on a significant amount of speculation.

100% this. Although the website says parents will be notified in late June/early July. They do evaluate kids at the beginning of the school year though.


I bet they don't publish anything because it is not a fixed line. I also bet the scores for placement vary depending on the school. Especially if pp is correct and higher scores are based on outside tutoring/help. S. Arlington/lower income schools are less likely to have that help and there is still a pre-algebra class at these schools. I know for a fact that at our school we had no kids score as high as some of the numbers being through around here, but our MS still has a pre-algebra class. Especially when you add in the Spanish schools which may have a different space due to language (especially when kids are more behind these past couple years due to covid).

That makes sense. There may be some kids who can score highly on the test but not meet other readiness markers like attendance or study skills/work ethic. Automatically placing them would be a disservice

That might apply to some kids but in general, if a kid is scoring above the SOL/MI threshold for acceleration, it's unlikely they have issues with attendance. Scoring high on a test of knowledge (not aptitude) requires a kid to have worked with the material consistently.
A better approach is follow a PP's advice and do what FCPS does. Offer kids more challenging math material in ES so that all kids have the opportunity to accelerate in school. Then more kids would be able to meet the thresholds. Failing to offer more challenging material is ES will lead families that are able to seek enrichment outside of school, which will lead to widening gaps in the number of kids meeting accelerated math thresholds according to the SES level of the MS.

Our schools (one SA, one option) both provided opportunities for enrichment/acceleration.

Enrichment is not acceleration. Our SA ES was very clear that enrichment is fine but nothing above grade level was allowed. They can only go deeper, not faster/higher. Kids in a school with that approach who aren’t learning on their own or from a parent/tutor/outside vendor outside of school hours are NOT going to meet the score threshold. The economic/ethnic makeup of the accelerated class at our MS bears this out. APS is doing equity wrong and it pisses me off. It’s widening gaps, not closing them!

I am one of the previous PPs and agree completely. I am kicking around the idea of showing up to the school board with this argument next year. For my 2e child who thrives with math, enrichment does Jack shit and acceleration is exactly what they need. I accelerate at home - and that child thrives with respect to confidence. The school is being lazy by hiding behind “enrichment”. The enrichment is a complete waste of time.

Feel free to come to board meetings with me…I keep debating it with myself. But this - holding kids back in the name of equity - is simply wrong.

Yuk, the "deeper but not higher" myth raises its ugly head again.

I hope that those perpetrating it are not in a position to determine our children's math education - but to the extent that they are, they should remember that they will be fought every step of the way. (Recall VMPI and the political shifts to which it led.)

"Grade level" math is fundamentally incompatible with engaging mathematically talented children. To pick one of many examples: in VA, grade level standards do not introduce simple variables until 5th grade. No x, no y, no z. Good luck going "deeper" without variables. Actually, good luck even teaching your children the way you were taught in 2nd or 3rd grade 30 years ago when variables weren't taboo. Or, take another example: negative numbers - they're reserved for 5th graders also - mathematicians can only laugh at the idea of "going deeper" without them. Yet, we have to discuss with elementary school teachers why it's ok for our 3rd grader to be fluent in them.

In actuality, there's no notion of "going deeper but not higher." Advanced children will discover the need for, and inquire about concepts that are 2-4 years ahead of what the school establishment considers "grade level." It is the duty of a teacher to respect this fact and support and teach those students no matter their actual grade or age. It is our responsibility as citizens to fight ideologues who (sometimes in the name of so-called "equity") want to hold our children back so that they conform to their notions.

Republicans lying and distorting the truth to push for votes? Yes, it's hard to forget.

Well, let's just say my child completed Algebra 1H in 6th grade with a perfect SOL score because a majority of voters rejected the ideas of the democratically led VDoE. To me, this was democracy at its finest. I also find it very fair and equitable that my child is given the same chances as children in the past, so there is some irony here that it took the defeat of an "equity" initiative to ensure my child was treated equitably

But even though we dodged this bullet the fight isn't quite over as some of these ideas haven't died. That's why it's important to remain vigilant, or else we end up like San Francisco where only the wealthy can afford the workarounds necessary to provide a proper math education for their children.

[Anonymous]

APS teacher here (4th). I just want to say, first, we don’t have a true adoption that we use. Teachers spend so much time making up SOL-aligned work. At every school. It’s insanity and APS does nothing to help. Yes we have envisions (I don’t even want to know the $$$$ that was spent on that). The issue is envisions is common core aligned which does not match VA SOLs, and then even the order of envisions does not match APS order of instructional units. There are mixed review questions on every page and often these review questions don’t relate to anything my students have learned so they are a total waste. There is a tiny 30 page section at the back of the workbook with VA specific work that we sometimes use. Also envisions is very clunky online to use, requiring a thousand clicks to get to the lesson tools you need. So if you want to know why there is not enough enrichment or acceleration opportunities, well, I’m just one person trying to get through all the instruction I have to do before SOLs and I barely get 90 minutes a day to make all my plans (one day is actually meetings). There just isn’t time to do all of what you want. Get me better instructional materials that align and are good so I don’t have to make up stuff every year (or, update what I made last year to be better or have different review questions because APS changed the order, etc).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:APS teacher here (4th). I just want to say, first, we don’t have a true adoption that we use. Teachers spend so much time making up SOL-aligned work. At every school. It’s insanity and APS does nothing to help. Yes we have envisions (I don’t even want to know the $$$$ that was spent on that). The issue is envisions is common core aligned which does not match VA SOLs, and then even the order of envisions does not match APS order of instructional units. There are mixed review questions on every page and often these review questions don’t relate to anything my students have learned so they are a total waste. There is a tiny 30 page section at the back of the workbook with VA specific work that we sometimes use. Also envisions is very clunky online to use, requiring a thousand clicks to get to the lesson tools you need. So if you want to know why there is not enough enrichment or acceleration opportunities, well, I’m just one person trying to get through all the instruction I have to do before SOLs and I barely get 90 minutes a day to make all my plans (one day is actually meetings). There just isn’t time to do all of what you want. Get me better instructional materials that align and are good so I don’t have to make up stuff every year (or, update what I made last year to be better or have different review questions because APS changed the order, etc).

I’m with you on this - I agree the weird order of SOLs in Virginia makes for a strange situation. But fcps can deepen and accelerate just fine under similar conditions. Those kids receive an appropriately differentiated curriculum. In APS, my kid had to sit and listen to material that she knew years ago - and pretend for her teacher that she didn’t know it and saw it as “deep” when she’d done much more challenging material at home. It’s a charade. APS should serve its gifted students with more than a weird worksheet here and there (on artwork?) to pretend there is extension. It’s simply not worth anyone’s time.

I think APS’ math curriculum is so weak that even a kid who is gifted, who isn’t receiving outside education, would not show up as gifted. I find it so sad. How are kids getting ready for higher level math?

[Anonymous]

526 SOL and end of year MI was 8xx (was higher mid year). Did not get placed for Pre-Algebra but math teacher moved my kid up to Pre-Algebra at the end of the first quarter. Has gotten A in all quarters. Though challenging at some concepts but nothing overly crazy to the point of failing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:APS teacher here (4th). I just want to say, first, we don’t have a true adoption that we use. Teachers spend so much time making up SOL-aligned work. At every school. It’s insanity and APS does nothing to help. Yes we have envisions (I don’t even want to know the $$$$ that was spent on that). The issue is envisions is common core aligned which does not match VA SOLs, and then even the order of envisions does not match APS order of instructional units. There are mixed review questions on every page and often these review questions don’t relate to anything my students have learned so they are a total waste. There is a tiny 30 page section at the back of the workbook with VA specific work that we sometimes use. Also envisions is very clunky online to use, requiring a thousand clicks to get to the lesson tools you need. So if you want to know why there is not enough enrichment or acceleration opportunities, well, I’m just one person trying to get through all the instruction I have to do before SOLs and I barely get 90 minutes a day to make all my plans (one day is actually meetings). There just isn’t time to do all of what you want. Get me better instructional materials that align and are good so I don’t have to make up stuff every year (or, update what I made last year to be better or have different review questions because APS changed the order, etc).

I didn't know what envisions are when I first read this post, but then I was going through all the stuff my kids brought back home from school, and found brand-new Envision workbooks. 2 volumes per kid. They look like nice workbooks, but my kids will never use them. Seems like a big waste!

[Anonymous]

We did rip out what we used so even if they look new that doesn’t mean we didn’t use any. It just has very limited usefulness considering the money paid.

[Anonymous]

Has APS loaded any math placement letters into Parentvue? Don’t see ours for Williamsburg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has APS loaded any math placement letters into Parentvue? Don’t see ours for Williamsburg.

Message from Swanson told us the first week in July so I hadn't looked yet today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has APS loaded any math placement letters into Parentvue? Don’t see ours for Williamsburg.

Not in ours yet for Gunston but I heard that they are all created. So hopefully soon.