What’s next to AMP 7?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

I don’t really understand why prealgebra needs to be learned in 3 years. It seems painfully slow. Afterwards everything just crammed into high school math curriculum and kids lose interest in math.

Because kids need to learn more than just the facts but also how to use the basic to manipulate in real world application and how to think abstractly. All of this matters when kids get to Alg 2, Pre_Cal, Calcus, Physics. This is where the problems being seen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

Sure, and everything in K-5 gets recovered later in one way or the other, too. Kids still go through those curricula to build foundation, just as most do with 6/7/8, and it has little to do with none of these students being precocious.

Per MCPS, grade acceleration (skipping of a year or more) is limited to one-off cases here and there, only after other enrichments/standard compaction-based acceleration have been employed and proven too limited for the subject students. One wonders, how do the few schools facilitating groups of students going straight from Math 5/6 to Algebra identify all of those precocious kids as ready to do so?

For us it was on the registration form for all kids but you needed higher map scores and grades. I don’t think it’s a great idea to skip pre algebra so we did prep the summer before. But all kids who qualify can do algebra in 7th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

Sure, and everything in K-5 gets recovered later in one way or the other, too. Kids still go through those curricula to build foundation, just as most do with 6/7/8, and it has little to do with none of these students being precocious.

Per MCPS, grade acceleration (skipping of a year or more) is limited to one-off cases here and there, only after other enrichments/standard compaction-based acceleration have been employed and proven too limited for the subject students. One wonders, how do the few schools facilitating groups of students going straight from Math 5/6 to Algebra identify all of those precocious kids as ready to do so?

For us it was on the registration form for all kids but you needed higher map scores and grades. I don’t think it’s a great idea to skip pre algebra so we did prep the summer before. But all kids who qualify can do algebra in 7th.

That question was about Algebra in 6th, not 7th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

Sure, and everything in K-5 gets recovered later in one way or the other, too. Kids still go through those curricula to build foundation, just as most do with 6/7/8, and it has little to do with none of these students being precocious.

Per MCPS, grade acceleration (skipping of a year or more) is limited to one-off cases here and there, only after other enrichments/standard compaction-based acceleration have been employed and proven too limited for the subject students. One wonders, how do the few schools facilitating groups of students going straight from Math 5/6 to Algebra identify all of those precocious kids as ready to do so?

For us it was on the registration form for all kids but you needed higher map scores and grades. I don’t think it’s a great idea to skip pre algebra so we did prep the summer before. But all kids who qualify can do algebra in 7th.

That question was about Algebra in 6th, not 7th.

Yes that’s how it worked

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

Sure, and everything in K-5 gets recovered later in one way or the other, too. Kids still go through those curricula to build foundation, just as most do with 6/7/8, and it has little to do with none of these students being precocious.

Per MCPS, grade acceleration (skipping of a year or more) is limited to one-off cases here and there, only after other enrichments/standard compaction-based acceleration have been employed and proven too limited for the subject students. One wonders, how do the few schools facilitating groups of students going straight from Math 5/6 to Algebra identify all of those precocious kids as ready to do so?

For us it was on the registration form for all kids but you needed higher map scores and grades. I don’t think it’s a great idea to skip pre algebra so we did prep the summer before. But all kids who qualify can do algebra in 7th.

That question was about Algebra in 6th, not 7th.

Yes that’s how it worked

At which middle school(s) is there a registration form that includes an option to pursue Algebra in 6th, and what specific guidance is given for qualifying MAP scores and grades?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

Sure, and everything in K-5 gets recovered later in one way or the other, too. Kids still go through those curricula to build foundation, just as most do with 6/7/8, and it has little to do with none of these students being precocious.

Per MCPS, grade acceleration (skipping of a year or more) is limited to one-off cases here and there, only after other enrichments/standard compaction-based acceleration have been employed and proven too limited for the subject students. One wonders, how do the few schools facilitating groups of students going straight from Math 5/6 to Algebra identify all of those precocious kids as ready to do so?

For us it was on the registration form for all kids but you needed higher map scores and grades. I don’t think it’s a great idea to skip pre algebra so we did prep the summer before. But all kids who qualify can do algebra in 7th.

That question was about Algebra in 6th, not 7th.

Yes that’s how it worked

At which middle school(s) is there a registration form that includes an option to pursue Algebra in 6th, and what specific guidance is given for qualifying MAP scores and grades?

This did not apply to my kid, who is fine with AIM, but it's possible that it's not on the registration form and instead is done on a case-by-case basis. We know someone who took AIM in 5th via virtual academy because she was so far ahead in math and did algebra in 6th with no problems - they were not going to make her repeat AIM.

[Anonymous]

Algebra 1 in 6th grade is not on any registration form to my knowledge.

My child took Algebra 1 in 6th grade after being in pool for the magnet but not getting picked. We specifically requested it, since the CES compacted math had been very easy and slow. The math coordinator at our home middle school makes these students take a test the summer before 6th grade to see if they can handle the class. I believe this is the standard procedure for families who request a higher-level class that is not publicly available, and it works for language classes too, since my other child was able to test into a higher-level class in our native language that wasn't the beginner one that's automatically offered.

There's a lot more to that story, including the fact that MCPS tries its best these days to prevent students from being accelerated beyond the normal tracks, in any subject, but in theory, that's how it works.

My mathy child took Honors Geo in 7th and will be bused to our high school for Algebra 2 in 8th. So far, it's all been easy, and I don't anticipate my child will have any trouble with pre-calc, AP calc, multi-variable, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

Sure, and everything in K-5 gets recovered later in one way or the other, too. Kids still go through those curricula to build foundation, just as most do with 6/7/8, and it has little to do with none of these students being precocious.

Per MCPS, grade acceleration (skipping of a year or more) is limited to one-off cases here and there, only after other enrichments/standard compaction-based acceleration have been employed and proven too limited for the subject students. One wonders, how do the few schools facilitating groups of students going straight from Math 5/6 to Algebra identify all of those precocious kids as ready to do so?

Same way they place students who transfer in from private: take a test, and score higher than the standard score for students who completed the course that the student wants to start. (Transfers take a placement test, public school students use MAP score)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

I don’t really understand why prealgebra needs to be learned in 3 years. It seems painfully slow. Afterwards everything just crammed into high school math curriculum and kids lose interest in math.

Because kids need to learn more than just the facts but also how to use the basic to manipulate in real world application and how to think abstractly. All of this matters when kids get to Alg 2, Pre_Cal, Calcus, Physics. This is where the problems being seen.

Yes, and some students pick that up quickly the first time through, and other students need more time or hit a wall they never pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

Sure, and everything in K-5 gets recovered later in one way or the other, too. Kids still go through those curricula to build foundation, just as most do with 6/7/8, and it has little to do with none of these students being precocious.

Per MCPS, grade acceleration (skipping of a year or more) is limited to one-off cases here and there, only after other enrichments/standard compaction-based acceleration have been employed and proven too limited for the subject students. One wonders, how do the few schools facilitating groups of students going straight from Math 5/6 to Algebra identify all of those precocious kids as ready to do so?

Same way they place students who transfer in from private: take a test, and score higher than the standard score for students who completed the course that the student wants to start. (Transfers take a placement test, public school students use MAP score)

Great. NWEA norms show 50th percentile is either 230 (Spring 9th grade) or 229 (Fall 10th grade). The majority of the country would have taken Algebra by this point, with many considerably beyond that. Does MCPS, then, consider a 231 acceptable for starting Algebra in 6th?

The magnet lottery criteria that results in central AIM placement is locally-normed 85th (along with As and adequate reading level), which would probably be 236 for the fall of 5th grade (from which the determination is made) at a low-FARMS school, tracking to a 248 in the spring (same unnormed 96th %ile -- assumption, there, since they haven't make this year's actual locally-normed cutoffs public, or even the full adjustment-included paradigm). Even unnormed 85th would be 236 for the spring. If that was the case, many, many around the county would be considered "ready" for Algebra, including nearly all of those placed in AIM.

You may be referring to different criteria (e.g., average for MCPS students having just completed Algebra, which may be higher than 231). Completing the thought with this kind of detail would be helpful, as lack of such just tends to fuel speculation.

If this is the way Algebra in 6th placement is done, the other part of the issue would be knowing whether all MCPS middle schools follow the same process, or if some facilitate it, making it known via regiatration or otherwise and working with parent requests, while others do not. From which middle school(s) were you drawing your experience about the test standard?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Algebra 1 in 6th grade is not on any registration form to my knowledge.

My child took Algebra 1 in 6th grade after being in pool for the magnet but not getting picked. We specifically requested it, since the CES compacted math had been very easy and slow. The math coordinator at our home middle school makes these students take a test the summer before 6th grade to see if they can handle the class. I believe this is the standard procedure for families who request a higher-level class that is not publicly available, and it works for language classes too, since my other child was able to test into a higher-level class in our native language that wasn't the beginner one that's automatically offered.

There's a lot more to that story, including the fact that MCPS tries its best these days to prevent students from being accelerated beyond the normal tracks, in any subject, but in theory, that's how it works.

My mathy child took Honors Geo in 7th and will be bused to our high school for Algebra 2 in 8th. So far, it's all been easy, and I don't anticipate my child will have any trouble with pre-calc, AP calc, multi-variable, etc.

This is different from both the available-at-registration note and the MAP-criteria note, and I assume you're experience is different from that of those posters. Clearly some schools are facilitating this. To which one are you referring? This would allow those interested elsewhere to point to an example when advocating -- knowledge empowers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

Sure, and everything in K-5 gets recovered later in one way or the other, too. Kids still go through those curricula to build foundation, just as most do with 6/7/8, and it has little to do with none of these students being precocious.

Per MCPS, grade acceleration (skipping of a year or more) is limited to one-off cases here and there, only after other enrichments/standard compaction-based acceleration have been employed and proven too limited for the subject students. One wonders, how do the few schools facilitating groups of students going straight from Math 5/6 to Algebra identify all of those precocious kids as ready to do so?

For us it was on the registration form for all kids but you needed higher map scores and grades. I don’t think it’s a great idea to skip pre algebra so we did prep the summer before. But all kids who qualify can do algebra in 7th.

That question was about Algebra in 6th, not 7th.

Yes that’s how it worked

At which middle school(s) is there a registration form that includes an option to pursue Algebra in 6th, and what specific guidance is given for qualifying MAP scores and grades?

Crickets? Or, perhaps, just a busy weekend...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

One could say "slowly ease" or one could say "build a solid foundation". They circle back over topics, and slightly expanding on them, again and again to build a good understanding of the maths, rather than just successfully solving the problem du jour week after week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much all of on-grade-level 6th, 7th and 8th grade Math is preparation for Algebra. There's a fair amount of year-to-year review/repetition with increasing complexity while folding in certain new concepts. This is pretty much standard across all curricula in the country, not just MCPS, which now utilizes the Illustrative Math curriculum (a.k.a. LearnZillion) for middle school (and Algebra, whether in middle or high).

Where things differentiate is with non-standard curricula, and in MCPS and elsewhere, above-grade-level Math is accomplished via acceleration, mostly with "compacted" courses that combine more than one year's worth of standard curriculum, and rarely by grade-skipping. There's Math 4/5 and Math 5/6 in elementary, for example, getting through 3 years of curriculum in 4th and 5th grade. Discontinuities between the MCPS elementary Eureka curriculum and the middle Illustrative Math (a.k.a. LearnZillion) curriculum presented some challenges when they moved away from the proprietary Curriculum 2.0, which had spanned the entire elementary & secondary grades, but they have been working on that for a couple of years, now.

IM was created with C2.0, combining 7th and 8th grade Math into one year and leading to Algebra in 8th grade (a year ahead). AIM was an adjusted IM for advanced 6th graders who already had completed the 6th grade curriculum via acceleration in elementary once they offered the Compacted 4/5 & 5/6 -- additional content existed in AIM to be sure that the elementary compaction hadn't left anything out, so it was considered more challenging both from an age perspective and from a content perspective; it led to Algebra in 7th (two years ahead).

When MCPS moved on from C2.0 to Eureka & Illustrative Math, the only compacting acceleration that was offered by the vendors was AMP6+ and AMP7+. These combined 6th-, 7th- and 8th- grade Math curricula into two years (AMP6+ is 6th and half of 7th, while AMP7+ is half of 7th and 8th). MCPS had to do their own work to recreate Math 4/5 and Math 5/6, which were hard enough to do, but didn't have confidence that they could do the same for AIM or IM, in good part from the logistics of having teachers trained to deliver multiple versions of middle school content. As there still was demand/need for that acceleration, though, those C2.0 courses stayed on for a bit while they figured things out and trained up on the AMPs. There were inconsistencies introduced, then, with the C2.0 content neither following properly from the new curriculum's 6th-grade content nor fully preparing for the new Algebra course.

Given this and the spiral nature of the curriculum (many concepts revisited again in later grades, with increasing complexity), MCPS may be moving on from AIM & IM by utilizing AMP7+ with Algebra following in either 7th or 8th, depending on prior acceleration. (Yes, there appear to be whole classes in certain schools who get there a full year earlier by skipping a grade in elementary, but that's for another thread.) This would simplify things but leave the first half of the Math 7 curriculum uncovered, so they need to be sure that it really is material that gets repeated from/in other grades (or otherwise covered via extracurriculars) to ensure the associated concepts are absorbed before taking Algebra, passage of which is of high importance, given State of Maryland requirements.

MCPS could write all this down somewhere, but, honestly, most folks don't care about this much detail. What many do want to know is what the options for acceleration are, how and to whom those are offered, how articulation happens from grade to grade or school to school, and what, if any, curriculum supports (at home or otherwise) might be needed/advised. The downstream consequences (i.e., paths/courses available after Algebra, impact on college admissions, etc.) are also of interest -- those have been discussed in yet other threads

All MCPS needs to do is create classes specifically for those that took Compacted math in ES. This can be accomplished by offer a bridge summer class that covers the first half of 7th grade content that is taught in AMP6+, OR create IM 1(All of 7th & first half 8th) and IM2/Alg1(key topics from 2nd half of 8th and all of Alg 1)OR Accelerated AMP7++(All of 7th and 8th)

I personally like to ensure that the all kids have a strong foundation for taking Alg so don’t recommend skipping 7th.

MCPS has an advanced track. It is algebra in 7th or 6th.

Detail would be helpful, as the question posed by the poster to whom you responded was, essentially, "How will the bridge from the 6th-grade curriculum (whenever that is covered) to Algebra in one year manifest without IM/AIM (which were the old Curriculum 2.0 courses that covered 7th- & 8th-grade content)?" Of the available Illustrative Math courses, Math 7 and Math 8 would take two years, while AMP7+ leaves out instruction of the first half of the 7th-grade curriculum.

The "tracks" have already been discussed, including 6th-grade Algebra, which is a red herring to this discussion. MCPS doesn't say anything about that publicly -- where it is commonly implemented, where entire classes might be created, how/where prerequisite curriculum is covered before 6th, how/where later coursework (e.g., Algebra 2 in 8th) is provided, what criteria are used to determine placement (or offering), etc. -- other than to note course advancement as the pinnacle enrichment option. It is known to happen. This reticence, then, is a basis of information-based inequity of opportunity, engenders mistrust of the school system and causes speculation, here and elsewhere.

However, it is not really germaine to this thread or the many others that folks routinely bomb with claims of special treatment for W/Potomac-area feeders. Start a separate thread, if needed, or resurrect an old one that focuses specifically on that.

#Poe'sLaw #DCUMgonnaDCUM

The 6th grade Algebra is not just for W schools but you keep believing that. We are not in a W school area and never have been. My child did it in 6th. We've listed the schools many times. Our kids at our school skipped AIM and went from compacted math to Algebra. The issue becomes what happens with Algebra 2, and the kids either take it at their MS or are bused/driven to the HS. Really, it's not any big deal.

I think you misread my post. I wasn't claiming it was exclusive to Ws, but that some folks, here, routinely bomb any thread related to advanced math with that hyperbolic claim.

There's nothing wrong with your ES/MS offering it, and it's good to know the particular path (Math 5/6 straight to Algebra) that facilitated it. MCPS, however, doesn't make that information available, and the result is that only communities which are aware, from prior experience or otherwise, even get a realistic chance to ask/advocate for it. It certainly isn't right for all students, but all students should have an equal opportunity of access.

They are just changing the names to go along with the curriculum names. Its not all that big of a deal.

It's more than just a name change. AMP7+ still gets a student to Algebra next, but the half-year curricular gap it presents has the potential to be greater than the C2.0 AIM discontinuities with the Illustrative Math curriculum. Still, it's really good to know that whole groups students were able to perform well in Algebra when skipping the entire 7th & 8th curriculum (at least in class).

Nothing is skipped. Everything in Math 6/7/8 is covered in Algebra and Geometry.

Math 6/7/8 exists just to slowly ease kids into Algebra.

That's why precocious kids can go from 5th grade to Algebra in 6th.

Sure, and everything in K-5 gets recovered later in one way or the other, too. Kids still go through those curricula to build foundation, just as most do with 6/7/8, and it has little to do with none of these students being precocious.

Per MCPS, grade acceleration (skipping of a year or more) is limited to one-off cases here and there, only after other enrichments/standard compaction-based acceleration have been employed and proven too limited for the subject students. One wonders, how do the few schools facilitating groups of students going straight from Math 5/6 to Algebra identify all of those precocious kids as ready to do so?

For us it was on the registration form for all kids but you needed higher map scores and grades. I don’t think it’s a great idea to skip pre algebra so we did prep the summer before. But all kids who qualify can do algebra in 7th.

That question was about Algebra in 6th, not 7th.

Yes that’s how it worked

At which middle school(s) is there a registration form that includes an option to pursue Algebra in 6th, and what specific guidance is given for qualifying MAP scores and grades?

Please. Not this again. We’ve had like 5 threads on this topic that go round and round. A few posters insist this was possible at their schools but refuse to name the schools for various personal reasons. Other posters insist they are lying. I personally feel they are being truthful, although I do think mileage may vary year by year and even kid by kid in the same year. I know two kids who are literally next door neighbors who were told different things by Central office and the school math coordinator.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Algebra 1 in 6th grade is not on any registration form to my knowledge.

My child took Algebra 1 in 6th grade after being in pool for the magnet but not getting picked. We specifically requested it, since the CES compacted math had been very easy and slow. The math coordinator at our home middle school makes these students take a test the summer before 6th grade to see if they can handle the class. I believe this is the standard procedure for families who request a higher-level class that is not publicly available, and it works for language classes too, since my other child was able to test into a higher-level class in our native language that wasn't the beginner one that's automatically offered.

There's a lot more to that story, including the fact that MCPS tries its best these days to prevent students from being accelerated beyond the normal tracks, in any subject, but in theory, that's how it works.

My mathy child took Honors Geo in 7th and will be bused to our high school for Algebra 2 in 8th. So far, it's all been easy, and I don't anticipate my child will have any trouble with pre-calc, AP calc, multi-variable, etc.

This is different from both the available-at-registration note and the MAP-criteria note, and I assume you're experience is different from that of those posters. Clearly some schools are facilitating this. To which one are you referring? This would allow those interested elsewhere to point to an example when advocating -- knowledge empowers.

PP you replied to. No school is facilitating this. There is a troll that wakes up every time 6th grade Algebra is mentioned, who then fills the thread with screeds about how certain schools in wealthy neighborhoods get all the advanced options. This is not true at all, and 6th grade algebra is advertised nowhere. Our personal experience in the summer of 2021 showed that MCPS is actively trying to PREVENT kids from accessing those classes. It wouldn't surprise me that at some point, they will just stop offering the test-in option.

So with that information in mind, I do have to add that certain neighborhoods tend to have more parents who want those classes for their kids, and therefore it creates a slightly larger pool of people who can inform one another that if they ask for a test, they can get a test. Their kid still needs to do BETTER than the students who have already taken the class! But there is probably more information floating around in wealthier neighborhoods than in others, about this possibility of testing into a class. My kid is one of 3 such accelerated kids in their grade of about 300 in the BCC cluster.

Your point person is the math coordinator of your middle school. Two years ago, our math coordinator referenced a curriculum supervisor, and I understood it was someone in central office, not our own Principal. Your confusion probably comes from the fact that when families ask for the test, the math coordinator looks at the child's previous scores on MAP and other standardized tests, as well as math grades, presumably to have the opportunity of saying no immediately and saving themselves a couple of hours of work. At least, that's how our coordinator acted in our middle school. I suspect that these cases are so rare, coordinators check in with their supervisors to get a procedure. If your coordinator starts saying no, remind them they can check in with their hierarchy, because it's been done before, and there is a known procedure.