Math equity nonsense LCPS

[Anonymous]

To the teacher on this thread — do you use a textbook for Algebra I and if so which one?

[Anonymous]

I am "stuck" at my school using the Common Core textbooks for Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra2. They aren't too bad, but don't have a huge selection of practice problems.

I thank my lucky stars that my school still requires textbooks. Though the kids can access the books online, I really encourage my kids to use a "book book" - there's no question that they learn better out of a "real" - i.e., paper - book.

I supplement a lot. My favorite textbook for supplementing (and I'd love to have it as the class text if I could!) is the Brown/Dolciani book "Algebra: Structure and Method, Book 1." Lots of good practice problems. My favorite text for supplementing Algebra 2 is Merrill's "Algebra: Structure and Method" by Foster, Gordon, et al. These are solid no nonsense texts - not a lot of pictures but a lot of practice problems and solid explanations of the concepts. I'd rather have this kind of a text and I'll supplement with more interesting and complex problems and concepts, than have a book with too many "cutesy" graphics and pictures but a limited number of practice problems.

Because present day Algebra classes involve a lot more data, statistics, and different types of word problems than these older texts, I supplement those supplements, too.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for this data on textbooks. I think it’s so sad that books are going away. I’ll check out the ones you are using for supplements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They may be able to factor basic quadratic equations where "a" = 1, but have no idea how to do it when the factoring gets a lot more complicated, and have very little idea of the mathematical concepts behind factoring in general, so that they can apply those concepts to solve the more complicated factoring problems.

Do you think those watered down 6th and 7th grade algebra classes are teaching how to factor quadratic equations with a =/= 1? Is this skill part of the algebra 1 standards? Why do you think algebra 1 SOL performance decreases with the age at which algebra 1 is taken?

The factoring example was just that - an example. Of course factoring, no matter what "a" is, is part of the Algebra 1 standards. You can look it up. I'm saying that it's frequently not taught or not taught to the necessary depth in 6th and 7th grade Algebra 1 courses because most kids aren't ready to learn those concepts. Or they can learn it, but it takes way too long to teach it, going over and over it, lots of practice, taking up a lot of time, so we can't get to some of the rest of the concepts in a full Algebra 1 course. That leaves the kid missing concepts they need for upper level math courses.

Algebra is the basic stepping stone of upper level math - the kids need to be fluent in it. If they aren't, and/or if they were never exposed to concepts because we didn't have time because we were reviewing concepts that should have been covered in the previous course, I'll have to re-teach the missing concepts in Trig/PreCal or Cal, using up time we need to cover all the concepts in those classes...it's a "snowball effect."

I'm sure some 6th/7th grade classes provide a full breadth and depth Algebra 1 course and that some 6th/7th kids who take it do well. I'm just telling you that in my experience, from many years of teaching high school math, that most kids I have in my advanced classes who had Algebra in 6th, 7th, and even 8th grade do not have the depth and breadth and application of Algebra 1 course knowledge that most kids who took Algebra 1 in 9th grade have. There's something about the time in which the course was take, that the brain seems to be more ready to learn and apply the Algebra skills and concepts when the kid is older.

This is my experience, and it's based on many years of teaching. I know there are exceptions to this because I've seen it myself, but in general, taking Algebra 1 when the kid is older usually means the kid has more algebra skills, knowledge and application ability, and makes the next courses in the math sequence much more accessible to them because they have that in-depth Algebra knowledge.

I'd like to respond to the anecdotal observation that kids who took Algebra 1 in 9th grade have somehow more ready brains that may set them up for longterm success at a later age. I'm working a lot with students at the college level. Sometimes with very smart and motivated young adults, and sometimes with not so smart ones. Because I have children that age now, I tend to ask students I work with when they took Algebra 1. For the smart ones, the answer is always 7th grade (I haven't met a 6th algebra person.) On the other hand, I'm seeing lots of college students lacking basic prealgebra/algebra knowledge, such as not being able to turn a periodic decimal into a fraction. Very often, they talk about taking calculus tests (in college!). I have not seen those late-blooming students whom you seem to encounter. Indeed, those students who are taking Algebra 1 in 9th grade often do not make it to Calculus in 12th. Simultaneously, the number of students who need remedial precalculus (not calculus!) in college has reached record highs, even in otherwise competitive engineering departments (these numbers are not usually publicly shared, but they incur a very real risk of diminishing 4-year graduation rates and are of great concern to certain university administrators).

So we both may have selection bias in our observations, that's all I'm saying. Further study to remove those is needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They may be able to factor basic quadratic equations where "a" = 1, but have no idea how to do it when the factoring gets a lot more complicated, and have very little idea of the mathematical concepts behind factoring in general, so that they can apply those concepts to solve the more complicated factoring problems.

Do you think those watered down 6th and 7th grade algebra classes are teaching how to factor quadratic equations with a =/= 1? Is this skill part of the algebra 1 standards? Why do you think algebra 1 SOL performance decreases with the age at which algebra 1 is taken?

The factoring example was just that - an example. Of course factoring, no matter what "a" is, is part of the Algebra 1 standards. You can look it up. I'm saying that it's frequently not taught or not taught to the necessary depth in 6th and 7th grade Algebra 1 courses because most kids aren't ready to learn those concepts. Or they can learn it, but it takes way too long to teach it, going over and over it, lots of practice, taking up a lot of time, so we can't get to some of the rest of the concepts in a full Algebra 1 course. That leaves the kid missing concepts they need for upper level math courses.

Algebra is the basic stepping stone of upper level math - the kids need to be fluent in it. If they aren't, and/or if they were never exposed to concepts because we didn't have time because we were reviewing concepts that should have been covered in the previous course, I'll have to re-teach the missing concepts in Trig/PreCal or Cal, using up time we need to cover all the concepts in those classes...it's a "snowball effect."

I'm sure some 6th/7th grade classes provide a full breadth and depth Algebra 1 course and that some 6th/7th kids who take it do well. I'm just telling you that in my experience, from many years of teaching high school math, that most kids I have in my advanced classes who had Algebra in 6th, 7th, and even 8th grade do not have the depth and breadth and application of Algebra 1 course knowledge that most kids who took Algebra 1 in 9th grade have. There's something about the time in which the course was take, that the brain seems to be more ready to learn and apply the Algebra skills and concepts when the kid is older.

This is my experience, and it's based on many years of teaching. I know there are exceptions to this because I've seen it myself, but in general, taking Algebra 1 when the kid is older usually means the kid has more algebra skills, knowledge and application ability, and makes the next courses in the math sequence much more accessible to them because they have that in-depth Algebra knowledge.

I'd like to respond to the anecdotal observation that kids who took Algebra 1 in 9th grade have somehow more ready brains that may set them up for longterm success at a later age. I'm working a lot with students at the college level. Sometimes with very smart and motivated young adults, and sometimes with not so smart ones. Because I have children that age now, I tend to ask students I work with when they took Algebra 1. For the smart ones, the answer is always 7th grade (I haven't met a 6th algebra person.) On the other hand, I'm seeing lots of college students lacking basic prealgebra/algebra knowledge, such as not being able to turn a periodic decimal into a fraction. Very often, they talk about taking calculus tests (in college!). I have not seen those late-blooming students whom you seem to encounter. Indeed, those students who are taking Algebra 1 in 9th grade often do not make it to Calculus in 12th. Simultaneously, the number of students who need remedial precalculus (not calculus!) in college has reached record highs, even in otherwise competitive engineering departments (these numbers are not usually publicly shared, but they incur a very real risk of diminishing 4-year graduation rates and are of great concern to certain university administrators).

So we both may have selection bias in our observations, that's all I'm saying. Further study to remove those is needed.

DP. The teacher PP has extreme selection bias, because their school system makes no sense and is not even remotely close to how almost all other schools operate. Apparently, at their school system, anyone who wants 6th grade Algebra can put their kids in, and then the classes are watered down to accommodate the kids who aren't ready. Of course the kids who weren't ready for Algebra in the first place and then took watered down Algebra I and Geometry aren't going to be ready for Algebra II. It has nothing whatsoever to do with age or maturity, and everything to do with absurd policies and poor instruction.

In almost every single other school system, kids can only take Algebra in 6th or 7th if they pass some sort of placement test. Then, the Algebra class is not watered down. In that case, the younger kids generally do fine in Algebra II and generally outperform the older kids in the same class.

[Anonymous]

Thank you for posting. This is scary and sounds like what they want to do at Alexandria City high School. ACPS says it values equity above all else.

Anonymous wrote:Just a reminder to vote current school board out! Came across this article on how incredibly harmful equity based school curriculum is based on what’s happened in California and this is coming for us in Loudoun with our current school board

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/california-math-framework-algebra/675509/

“Unfortunately, not every state has a critical mass of academic experts and private-sector tech practitioners to push back when school systems try to rebrand an inferior math education as something new and innovative. The students who are most reliant upon public schools are the most harmed when districts embrace policies based on superficial appeals to equity or false promises about future job opportunities. When only the children of families with resources beyond the public schools are gaining preparation for the lucrative degrees and secure jobs of the future, public education is failing in a primary duty.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They may be able to factor basic quadratic equations where "a" = 1, but have no idea how to do it when the factoring gets a lot more complicated, and have very little idea of the mathematical concepts behind factoring in general, so that they can apply those concepts to solve the more complicated factoring problems.

Do you think those watered down 6th and 7th grade algebra classes are teaching how to factor quadratic equations with a =/= 1? Is this skill part of the algebra 1 standards? Why do you think algebra 1 SOL performance decreases with the age at which algebra 1 is taken?

The factoring example was just that - an example. Of course factoring, no matter what "a" is, is part of the Algebra 1 standards. You can look it up. I'm saying that it's frequently not taught or not taught to the necessary depth in 6th and 7th grade Algebra 1 courses because most kids aren't ready to learn those concepts. Or they can learn it, but it takes way too long to teach it, going over and over it, lots of practice, taking up a lot of time, so we can't get to some of the rest of the concepts in a full Algebra 1 course. That leaves the kid missing concepts they need for upper level math courses.

Algebra is the basic stepping stone of upper level math - the kids need to be fluent in it. If they aren't, and/or if they were never exposed to concepts because we didn't have time because we were reviewing concepts that should have been covered in the previous course, I'll have to re-teach the missing concepts in Trig/PreCal or Cal, using up time we need to cover all the concepts in those classes...it's a "snowball effect."

I'm sure some 6th/7th grade classes provide a full breadth and depth Algebra 1 course and that some 6th/7th kids who take it do well. I'm just telling you that in my experience, from many years of teaching high school math, that most kids I have in my advanced classes who had Algebra in 6th, 7th, and even 8th grade do not have the depth and breadth and application of Algebra 1 course knowledge that most kids who took Algebra 1 in 9th grade have. There's something about the time in which the course was take, that the brain seems to be more ready to learn and apply the Algebra skills and concepts when the kid is older.

This is my experience, and it's based on many years of teaching. I know there are exceptions to this because I've seen it myself, but in general, taking Algebra 1 when the kid is older usually means the kid has more algebra skills, knowledge and application ability, and makes the next courses in the math sequence much more accessible to them because they have that in-depth Algebra knowledge.

I'd like to respond to the anecdotal observation that kids who took Algebra 1 in 9th grade have somehow more ready brains that may set them up for longterm success at a later age. I'm working a lot with students at the college level. Sometimes with very smart and motivated young adults, and sometimes with not so smart ones. Because I have children that age now, I tend to ask students I work with when they took Algebra 1. For the smart ones, the answer is always 7th grade (I haven't met a 6th algebra person.) On the other hand, I'm seeing lots of college students lacking basic prealgebra/algebra knowledge, such as not being able to turn a periodic decimal into a fraction. Very often, they talk about taking calculus tests (in college!). I have not seen those late-blooming students whom you seem to encounter. Indeed, those students who are taking Algebra 1 in 9th grade often do not make it to Calculus in 12th. Simultaneously, the number of students who need remedial precalculus (not calculus!) in college has reached record highs, even in otherwise competitive engineering departments (these numbers are not usually publicly shared, but they incur a very real risk of diminishing 4-year graduation rates and are of great concern to certain university administrators).

So we both may have selection bias in our observations, that's all I'm saying. Further study to remove those is needed.

DP. The teacher PP has extreme selection bias, because their school system makes no sense and is not even remotely close to how almost all other schools operate. Apparently, at their school system, anyone who wants 6th grade Algebra can put their kids in, and then the classes are watered down to accommodate the kids who aren't ready. Of course the kids who weren't ready for Algebra in the first place and then took watered down Algebra I and Geometry aren't going to be ready for Algebra II. It has nothing whatsoever to do with age or maturity, and everything to do with absurd policies and poor instruction.

In almost every single other school system, kids can only take Algebra in 6th or 7th if they pass some sort of placement test. Then, the Algebra class is not watered down. In that case, the younger kids generally do fine in Algebra II and generally outperform the older kids in the same class.

I’m LCPS there is a low-bar placement test to take Foundations of Algebra in 6th grade, and then from there anyone who demands it can take Algebra in 7th. And so on. I’ve never heard of a kid refused a math class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They may be able to factor basic quadratic equations where "a" = 1, but have no idea how to do it when the factoring gets a lot more complicated, and have very little idea of the mathematical concepts behind factoring in general, so that they can apply those concepts to solve the more complicated factoring problems.

Do you think those watered down 6th and 7th grade algebra classes are teaching how to factor quadratic equations with a =/= 1? Is this skill part of the algebra 1 standards? Why do you think algebra 1 SOL performance decreases with the age at which algebra 1 is taken?

The factoring example was just that - an example. Of course factoring, no matter what "a" is, is part of the Algebra 1 standards. You can look it up. I'm saying that it's frequently not taught or not taught to the necessary depth in 6th and 7th grade Algebra 1 courses because most kids aren't ready to learn those concepts. Or they can learn it, but it takes way too long to teach it, going over and over it, lots of practice, taking up a lot of time, so we can't get to some of the rest of the concepts in a full Algebra 1 course. That leaves the kid missing concepts they need for upper level math courses.

Algebra is the basic stepping stone of upper level math - the kids need to be fluent in it. If they aren't, and/or if they were never exposed to concepts because we didn't have time because we were reviewing concepts that should have been covered in the previous course, I'll have to re-teach the missing concepts in Trig/PreCal or Cal, using up time we need to cover all the concepts in those classes...it's a "snowball effect."

I'm sure some 6th/7th grade classes provide a full breadth and depth Algebra 1 course and that some 6th/7th kids who take it do well. I'm just telling you that in my experience, from many years of teaching high school math, that most kids I have in my advanced classes who had Algebra in 6th, 7th, and even 8th grade do not have the depth and breadth and application of Algebra 1 course knowledge that most kids who took Algebra 1 in 9th grade have. There's something about the time in which the course was take, that the brain seems to be more ready to learn and apply the Algebra skills and concepts when the kid is older.

This is my experience, and it's based on many years of teaching. I know there are exceptions to this because I've seen it myself, but in general, taking Algebra 1 when the kid is older usually means the kid has more algebra skills, knowledge and application ability, and makes the next courses in the math sequence much more accessible to them because they have that in-depth Algebra knowledge.

I'd like to respond to the anecdotal observation that kids who took Algebra 1 in 9th grade have somehow more ready brains that may set them up for longterm success at a later age. I'm working a lot with students at the college level. Sometimes with very smart and motivated young adults, and sometimes with not so smart ones. Because I have children that age now, I tend to ask students I work with when they took Algebra 1. For the smart ones, the answer is always 7th grade (I haven't met a 6th algebra person.) On the other hand, I'm seeing lots of college students lacking basic prealgebra/algebra knowledge, such as not being able to turn a periodic decimal into a fraction. Very often, they talk about taking calculus tests (in college!). I have not seen those late-blooming students whom you seem to encounter. Indeed, those students who are taking Algebra 1 in 9th grade often do not make it to Calculus in 12th. Simultaneously, the number of students who need remedial precalculus (not calculus!) in college has reached record highs, even in otherwise competitive engineering departments (these numbers are not usually publicly shared, but they incur a very real risk of diminishing 4-year graduation rates and are of great concern to certain university administrators).

So we both may have selection bias in our observations, that's all I'm saying. Further study to remove those is needed.

DP. The teacher PP has extreme selection bias, because their school system makes no sense and is not even remotely close to how almost all other schools operate. Apparently, at their school system, anyone who wants 6th grade Algebra can put their kids in, and then the classes are watered down to accommodate the kids who aren't ready. Of course the kids who weren't ready for Algebra in the first place and then took watered down Algebra I and Geometry aren't going to be ready for Algebra II. It has nothing whatsoever to do with age or maturity, and everything to do with absurd policies and poor instruction.

In almost every single other school system, kids can only take Algebra in 6th or 7th if they pass some sort of placement test. Then, the Algebra class is not watered down. In that case, the younger kids generally do fine in Algebra II and generally outperform the older kids in the same class.

I’m LCPS there is a low-bar placement test to take Foundations of Algebra in 6th grade, and then from there anyone who demands it can take Algebra in 7th. And so on. I’ve never heard of a kid refused a math class.

The class names keep changing in LCPS. The test is to get into pre-algebra. Kids who do well in Foundations can get into algebra without taking prealgebra, but this may vary by school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LCPS adopted VMPI before the rest of the state.

One of their LCPS math staff sent an e-mail 'I support eliminating tracking for equity reasons.' They eliminated algebra in 6th grade, and she said she wanted to eliminate prealgebra in 6th grade as well.

There was parent pressure to reverse this, and they yielded a little bit after VMPI was eliminated by Youngkin(at least in name).
The numbers accepted to 6th and 7th grade algebra are down, but this could be due to COVID based learning declines.

Fairfax has been piloting E3 to cut back on advanced math, and Loudoun may adopt this as well with this board.

So much misinformation. Stop pushing lies to try to win a few votes.

From LCPS staff to Tina Mazzacane"
"My goal is to eliminate the choices to take PreAlgebra and Algebra in 6th grade."
"I am very passionate about this change and truly believe the only way to stop inequities in mathematics education is to stop the tracking of students."

Go on talking about how the proposed changes are to blend together algebra and geometry like they do in Europe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LCPS adopted VMPI before the rest of the state.

One of their LCPS math staff sent an e-mail 'I support eliminating tracking for equity reasons.' They eliminated algebra in 6th grade, and she said she wanted to eliminate prealgebra in 6th grade as well.

There was parent pressure to reverse this, and they yielded a little bit after VMPI was eliminated by Youngkin(at least in name).
The numbers accepted to 6th and 7th grade algebra are down, but this could be due to COVID based learning declines.

Fairfax has been piloting E3 to cut back on advanced math, and Loudoun may adopt this as well with this board.

So much misinformation. Stop pushing lies to try to win a few votes.

From LCPS staff to Tina Mazzacane"
"My goal is to eliminate the choices to take PreAlgebra and Algebra in 6th grade."
"I am very passionate about this change and truly believe the only way to stop inequities in mathematics education is to stop the tracking of students."

Go on talking about how the proposed changes are to blend together algebra and geometry like they do in Europe.

At no point were they eliminating acceleration - they always included calculus & IB as possible paths. As anyone can see if they look at those first presentations. And they completely clarified shortly after the question came up.

Go on pushing Republican propaganda. I’ll call out the lies and misinformation every time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LCPS adopted VMPI before the rest of the state.

One of their LCPS math staff sent an e-mail 'I support eliminating tracking for equity reasons.' They eliminated algebra in 6th grade, and she said she wanted to eliminate prealgebra in 6th grade as well.

There was parent pressure to reverse this, and they yielded a little bit after VMPI was eliminated by Youngkin(at least in name).
The numbers accepted to 6th and 7th grade algebra are down, but this could be due to COVID based learning declines.

Fairfax has been piloting E3 to cut back on advanced math, and Loudoun may adopt this as well with this board.

So much misinformation. Stop pushing lies to try to win a few votes.

From LCPS staff to Tina Mazzacane"
"My goal is to eliminate the choices to take PreAlgebra and Algebra in 6th grade."
"I am very passionate about this change and truly believe the only way to stop inequities in mathematics education is to stop the tracking of students."

Go on talking about how the proposed changes are to blend together algebra and geometry like they do in Europe.

Was that an actual email conversation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LCPS adopted VMPI before the rest of the state.

One of their LCPS math staff sent an e-mail 'I support eliminating tracking for equity reasons.' They eliminated algebra in 6th grade, and she said she wanted to eliminate prealgebra in 6th grade as well.

There was parent pressure to reverse this, and they yielded a little bit after VMPI was eliminated by Youngkin(at least in name).
The numbers accepted to 6th and 7th grade algebra are down, but this could be due to COVID based learning declines.

Fairfax has been piloting E3 to cut back on advanced math, and Loudoun may adopt this as well with this board.

So much misinformation. Stop pushing lies to try to win a few votes.

From LCPS staff to Tina Mazzacane"
"My goal is to eliminate the choices to take PreAlgebra and Algebra in 6th grade."
"I am very passionate about this change and truly believe the only way to stop inequities in mathematics education is to stop the tracking of students."

Go on talking about how the proposed changes are to blend together algebra and geometry like they do in Europe.

At no point were they eliminating acceleration - they always included calculus & IB as possible paths. As anyone can see if they look at those first presentations. And they completely clarified shortly after the question came up.

Go on pushing Republican propaganda. I’ll call out the lies and misinformation every time.

DP It's easy to offer courses; schools could offer topology if they wanted. The question was whether kids would have been prepared adequately to thrive in calculus.

[Anonymous]

So dumb. All schools need to do is to let the kids work on Khan Academy or whatever in class, and then do small group meetings to go over whatever topic a bunch of kids are working on at the same time.

Let the fast kids work ahead on their own until they need help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LCPS adopted VMPI before the rest of the state.

One of their LCPS math staff sent an e-mail 'I support eliminating tracking for equity reasons.' They eliminated algebra in 6th grade, and she said she wanted to eliminate prealgebra in 6th grade as well.

There was parent pressure to reverse this, and they yielded a little bit after VMPI was eliminated by Youngkin(at least in name).
The numbers accepted to 6th and 7th grade algebra are down, but this could be due to COVID based learning declines.

Fairfax has been piloting E3 to cut back on advanced math, and Loudoun may adopt this as well with this board.

So much misinformation. Stop pushing lies to try to win a few votes.

From LCPS staff to Tina Mazzacane"
"My goal is to eliminate the choices to take PreAlgebra and Algebra in 6th grade."
"I am very passionate about this change and truly believe the only way to stop inequities in mathematics education is to stop the tracking of students."

Go on talking about how the proposed changes are to blend together algebra and geometry like they do in Europe.

Was that an actual email conversation?

Both sentences were from the same e-mail, one side of the conversation while the others said things like thanks for your help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LCPS adopted VMPI before the rest of the state.

One of their LCPS math staff sent an e-mail 'I support eliminating tracking for equity reasons.' They eliminated algebra in 6th grade, and she said she wanted to eliminate prealgebra in 6th grade as well.

There was parent pressure to reverse this, and they yielded a little bit after VMPI was eliminated by Youngkin(at least in name).
The numbers accepted to 6th and 7th grade algebra are down, but this could be due to COVID based learning declines.

Fairfax has been piloting E3 to cut back on advanced math, and Loudoun may adopt this as well with this board.

So much misinformation. Stop pushing lies to try to win a few votes.

From LCPS staff to Tina Mazzacane"
"My goal is to eliminate the choices to take PreAlgebra and Algebra in 6th grade."
"I am very passionate about this change and truly believe the only way to stop inequities in mathematics education is to stop the tracking of students."

Go on talking about how the proposed changes are to blend together algebra and geometry like they do in Europe.

At no point were they eliminating acceleration - they always included calculus & IB as possible paths. As anyone can see if they look at those first presentations. And they completely clarified shortly after the question came up.

Go on pushing Republican propaganda. I’ll call out the lies and misinformation every time.

This is about LCPS, which did eliminate acceleration, and according to the e-mail had a goal of eliminating more acceleration-lesser acceleration to prealgebra. Algebra in 8th grade can put you on a path to calculus in high school but the current state is more acceleration than that is available and Loudoun got rid of it based on VMPI recommendations. There is more e-mails showing this, but you keep repeating the lies about they were not doing these things, things which you want adopted.