Compacted Math- FYI
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I agree. Given the pandemic situation, I would have been okay with MCPS enforcing a more rigorous cut-off than usual, and erring on the side of having kids repeat content for mastery. But this is bananas. They are effectively taking the really tippity top kids (who would under previous circumstances have been doing Pre-Algebra in 5th) and demoting them one level, and then treating everyone else as one big undifferentiated mass. That's bad for kids, bad for teachers, and ultimately bad for MCPS. |
Anonymous
| Absolutely crazy. |
Anonymous
|
Sorry, I don't believe it. |
Anonymous
| Better to get rid of it altogether than to try this ridiculousness. |
Anonymous
They wanted to get rid of it but parents fought back. This is their response to Parents. |
Anonymous
| I'm an elementary teacher and can confirm what OP said is true too... |
Anonymous
I totally believe it. If they have to make a decision about where to slow down the math curriculum and assess/reassess content mastery, 4th-6th is a no brainer. It allows them to ensure the greatest number of students have mastered foundational content before moving onto advance math. Those who have already mastered the material will continue to stand out and can be accelerated later via compact class in 22-23 school year or summer school. Additionally they still stay above or on part with the private schools because very few of them accelerate math before middle school. Not to mention, if entire classes of kids are moving quickly through material and bored, teachers will be able to easily accelerate that class. |
Anonymous
|
To whom was this guidance provided today?
Parent of a rising 4th grader here trying to understand what next year's math pathway will look like for my child (who had a 238 MAP M score for 3rd grade Winter MAP). Thanks for any/all insights. |
Anonymous
Yup. It makes sense when you look at it that way. |
Anonymous
| My child had to repeat a year of math in 3rd grade during a different "no more acceleration" phase. Luckily the teachers knew exactly what was going on and did provide acceleration for the repeaters when ever they could though the tests were still 4th grade math tests. Luckily every kid who was about to take 4th grade math for the 3rd time was given an HGC spot. It was really easy to answer the question they asked at that time about how your local school was not meeting your child's needs. Still ended up taking Multi Var in HS senior year. |
Anonymous
But it doesn’t though. How could slowing down higher performing students improve scores for lower performing students? Is the idea that lower performing students will improve through osmosis from bored higher performing students? |
Anonymous
Which kid to effectively get rid of it. Ridiculous. |
Anonymous
|
The guidance I'm aware of came out for students currently in 4th grade and enrolled in Math 4/5 about if they take Math 5 next year or move on to 5/6. The reason given was the loss of instructional time over the past year + to cover almost two years of content. There was a score for Fall and a score for Spring, I understood from what I heard that students could meet either the Fall or the Spring score, plus they had to have grades or a teacher advocacy AND strong scores on the district assessments. So it wasn't just MAP-M. Since the spring MAP window is still open, it doesn't seem that the number of students who will qualify could be known at this point. I also heard there will be new guidance for identifying students currently in 3rd grade, but I don't think that was shared yet. It sounds like schools wont be making those decisions but they will come from Central Office like the CES list does. |
Anonymous
The higher performing students also had content removed from their math class and will now have the opportunity to get it. Not to mention, there is some percentage of higher performing students ever year who drop down from AIM in 6th because its moving to fast or begin to struggle in high school. So if you’re going to make a recovery plan it makes sense to focus on ensuring content mastery where its most important for the largest number of students, as opposed to continuing to push ahead. Especially since math is a subject that continually builds upon itself. Will there be some percentage of students who are bored and well above the class, yes. But that percentage is likely to be smaller than in a normal year. They’ll be easily identifiable next year if that’s the case, and still have time to be accelerated later. If really necessary schools can create a separate section by grade, or pull out classes, or after school enrichment for these kids. But again, on the whole, this is part of a recovery plan. First focus is on what’s critical, then on the nice to have. It’s critical that the greatest majority of kids master content and move forward. Very few students need to be on a math path that has them taking Multi Var Cal senior year. |
Anonymous
| This entire thread is untrue. There wa as discussion and nothing has been decided. |