APS 6th grade pre algebra

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't be too hard to look back over many years of acceleration and see the results for these students, broken down by the performance on entrance tests to this pathway, SOL, MAP, COGAT, grades, etc.

SOL data is public. The 7th grade accelerated cohort has much stronger SOL performance in Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2 than the 8th or 9th grade Algebra 1 cohorts.

Obviously, there are many kids who should be accelerated 2 years and comparing the average test scores of those three populations would reflect that. The question is teasing out which kids (at the bottom of that cohort) would have been better served with just 1 year acceleration.

What % of those kids struggling is acceptable? How much would they benefit by getting another year of foundation skills?

The objective of raising the bar for placement is to improve outcomes for the kids on the cusp, which should theoretically increase SOL performance for two of the groups (7th & 8th Algebra 1).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, they base math placement completely on test scores (& the cut-offs have changed multiple times over the years). They say they talk to the 5th grade math teacher, but I’m skeptical.
Just know that APS policy is that you CAN parent place, but they will not tell you this explicitly. We had to fight to get my kid into algebra in 7th (test scores weren’t quite what they wanted), and it went well. Kid is currently doing well in algebra II in 9th.
I don’t think extra math classes are necessary, but you could review some things with your child this summer if you’re concerned.

To what extent does parent placing apply? I assume you can't parent place a 1st grader into prealgebra. Also if parent placing is policy, why did you have to fight to get your kid into 7th grade algebra?

Because I didn’t find out until after the fact that parent placement is the policy, and they initially just told us no. Then they agreed to reconsider after fall math testing (kid started in pre-algebra). After that, they moved him to algebra, where he had to make up a month’s worth of work in a short time, but it was well worth it.

I assume parent placement applies to classes open to kids in that grade, not a first grader taking pre-algebra.

I'm confused - if parent placement is the policy, why did they tell you "no" when you asked to place him into algebra? If you had know earlie, what would you have said / done differently to get hem to say "yes" instead?

I assume because they don’t want parents to know it’s the policy, so they can discourage parent placement? I don’t know.

I don't think it is 100% guaranteed. I know people who tried to parent place and were refused. I think its a case by case basis.

It is an APS Policy: Policy I-7.2.9.31

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid was in 6th in the 2019-20 school year taking the accelerated 6-7-8 class (this is the class that scrunches three years into one to get ready for Algebra). Then Algebra I intensified was online the next year.

This didn't go well at all. The teachers had to try to teach the missed last quarter of 6-7-8 during algebra and then every other class got behind.

It's very hard to tease out what was pandemic-caused vs poor placement decisions.

But the kids who took 6/7/8 before 19-20 had their compacted year before the pandemic. The current 11th & 12th graders.

Anyway, the more advanced mathy kids still make the cut even with the higher standards - these are the kids who truly need the extra acceleration.

Current 11th and 12th graders were taking a combination of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2 during the virtual years. These courses are the foundation for the advanced classes they are now taking and instruction was unavoidably impaired during virtual learning. These students are having to backfill content while in their advanced courses that was skipped or covered cursorily during virtual learning. Covid had a significant impact on current 11th and 12th graders too.

As to your second point, students that meet nationally accepted definitions of acceleration readiness should be allowed to accelerate. They should not have to surmount artificially inflated thresholds.

A single data point isn’t sufficient determination for acceleration.

Those kids who were appropriately accelerated are doing well now. The pandemic revealed the downsides of accelerating kids who could use more time on the fundamentals. There is no downside for slowing down acceleration for the non-mathy kids. Not every bright kid needs to be multiple years ahead in math.

Pass advanced SOL and a math skill measure (whether MI, IAAT, or other) are the standards for assessing acceleration readiness in NoVa and elsewhere. Test scores are objective measures of readiness.

No. The pandemic revealed how poorly virtual learning served students which is why so many students developed a weaker math foundation that they would have in non-pandemic times.

Each district has different requirements (tests, thresholds) at different points in time. There isn’t a universal threshold for placement. And each test changes/renormalizes periodically (MI in 2019). Thresholds change over time based on a variety of factors. Test changes, classroom performance, standardized testing performance, etc. Placement should also be informed by classroom performance, progress BOY/MOY/EOY, and parent/teacher input.

A higher threshold would support kids who could use more time reviewing foundational skills before jumping into algebra.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, they base math placement completely on test scores (& the cut-offs have changed multiple times over the years). They say they talk to the 5th grade math teacher, but I’m skeptical.
Just know that APS policy is that you CAN parent place, but they will not tell you this explicitly. We had to fight to get my kid into algebra in 7th (test scores weren’t quite what they wanted), and it went well. Kid is currently doing well in algebra II in 9th.
I don’t think extra math classes are necessary, but you could review some things with your child this summer if you’re concerned.

To what extent does parent placing apply? I assume you can't parent place a 1st grader into prealgebra. Also if parent placing is policy, why did you have to fight to get your kid into 7th grade algebra?

Because I didn’t find out until after the fact that parent placement is the policy, and they initially just told us no. Then they agreed to reconsider after fall math testing (kid started in pre-algebra). After that, they moved him to algebra, where he had to make up a month’s worth of work in a short time, but it was well worth it.

I assume parent placement applies to classes open to kids in that grade, not a first grader taking pre-algebra.

I'm confused - if parent placement is the policy, why did they tell you "no" when you asked to place him into algebra? If you had know earlie, what would you have said / done differently to get hem to say "yes" instead?

I assume because they don’t want parents to know it’s the policy, so they can discourage parent placement? I don’t know.

I don't think it is 100% guaranteed. I know people who tried to parent place and were refused. I think its a case by case basis.

It is an APS Policy: Policy I-7.2.9.31

+1. Thank you for posting. I am one of the posters above that parent placed. I only found out this was the policy when attending in person, pre-Covid middle school information nights where a parent would ask if this was the policy, and the presenter would say "yes". Someone asked every year I attended. Otherwise I would have never known.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, they base math placement completely on test scores (& the cut-offs have changed multiple times over the years). They say they talk to the 5th grade math teacher, but I’m skeptical.
Just know that APS policy is that you CAN parent place, but they will not tell you this explicitly. We had to fight to get my kid into algebra in 7th (test scores weren’t quite what they wanted), and it went well. Kid is currently doing well in algebra II in 9th.
I don’t think extra math classes are necessary, but you could review some things with your child this summer if you’re concerned.

To what extent does parent placing apply? I assume you can't parent place a 1st grader into prealgebra. Also if parent placing is policy, why did you have to fight to get your kid into 7th grade algebra?

Because I didn’t find out until after the fact that parent placement is the policy, and they initially just told us no. Then they agreed to reconsider after fall math testing (kid started in pre-algebra). After that, they moved him to algebra, where he had to make up a month’s worth of work in a short time, but it was well worth it.

I assume parent placement applies to classes open to kids in that grade, not a first grader taking pre-algebra.

I'm confused - if parent placement is the policy, why did they tell you "no" when you asked to place him into algebra? If you had know earlie, what would you have said / done differently to get hem to say "yes" instead?

I assume because they don’t want parents to know it’s the policy, so they can discourage parent placement? I don’t know.

I don't think it is 100% guaranteed. I know people who tried to parent place and were refused. I think its a case by case basis.

It is an APS Policy: Policy I-7.2.9.31

I can see two ways to counter a parent quoting that;

1. That policy refers to high school, as demonstrated by AP, dual enrollment, and other high school level courses being defined as "advanced courses".

2. "All students who desire enrollment in advanced courses and meet any applicable prerequisites shall be eligible for participation." -> the testing requirements are prerequisites, so if your child didn't meet them, they're not eligible

[Anonymous]

Oh and here's the link: https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/arlington/Board.nsf/files/CB4LYP58A334/$file/H-3%20-%20%20I-7.2.9.31%20Advanced%20Classes%20%202_3_22%20CLEAN.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't be too hard to look back over many years of acceleration and see the results for these students, broken down by the performance on entrance tests to this pathway, SOL, MAP, COGAT, grades, etc.

SOL data is public. The 7th grade accelerated cohort has much stronger SOL performance in Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2 than the 8th or 9th grade Algebra 1 cohorts.

Obviously, there are many kids who should be accelerated 2 years and comparing the average test scores of those three populations would reflect that. The question is teasing out which kids (at the bottom of that cohort) would have been better served with just 1 year acceleration.

What % of those kids struggling is acceptable? How much would they benefit by getting another year of foundation skills?

The objective of raising the bar for placement is to improve outcomes for the kids on the cusp, which should theoretically increase SOL performance for two of the groups (7th & 8th Algebra 1).

There's also the issue of teasing out which 8th grade algebra 1 students (at the top of the distribution) would have been better served with 2 years of acceleration, and which 7th grade algebra 1 students (at the middle to top of the distribution) would have been better served with 3 or more years of acceleration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't be too hard to look back over many years of acceleration and see the results for these students, broken down by the performance on entrance tests to this pathway, SOL, MAP, COGAT, grades, etc.

SOL data is public. The 7th grade accelerated cohort has much stronger SOL performance in Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2 than the 8th or 9th grade Algebra 1 cohorts.

Obviously, there are many kids who should be accelerated 2 years and comparing the average test scores of those three populations would reflect that. The question is teasing out which kids (at the bottom of that cohort) would have been better served with just 1 year acceleration.

What % of those kids struggling is acceptable? How much would they benefit by getting another year of foundation skills?

The objective of raising the bar for placement is to improve outcomes for the kids on the cusp, which should theoretically increase SOL performance for two of the groups (7th & 8th Algebra 1).

There's also the issue of teasing out which 8th grade algebra 1 students (at the top of the distribution) would have been better served with 2 years of acceleration, and which 7th grade algebra 1 students (at the middle to top of the distribution) would have been better served with 3 or more years of acceleration.

Sure. That’s where looking at students beyond a single data point is beneficial. 3+ years should be the rare exception.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't be too hard to look back over many years of acceleration and see the results for these students, broken down by the performance on entrance tests to this pathway, SOL, MAP, COGAT, grades, etc.

SOL data is public. The 7th grade accelerated cohort has much stronger SOL performance in Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2 than the 8th or 9th grade Algebra 1 cohorts.

Obviously, there are many kids who should be accelerated 2 years and comparing the average test scores of those three populations would reflect that. The question is teasing out which kids (at the bottom of that cohort) would have been better served with just 1 year acceleration.

What % of those kids struggling is acceptable? How much would they benefit by getting another year of foundation skills?

The objective of raising the bar for placement is to improve outcomes for the kids on the cusp, which should theoretically increase SOL performance for two of the groups (7th & 8th Algebra 1).

There's also the issue of teasing out which 8th grade algebra 1 students (at the top of the distribution) would have been better served with 2 years of acceleration, and which 7th grade algebra 1 students (at the middle to top of the distribution) would have been better served with 3 or more years of acceleration.

3 + years should be the rare exception.

Why? Given how much better 7th grade algebra 1 students do than 9th or 8th grade algebra 1 students, it's clear that many of them likely would have been at least as successful as 9th or 8th grade algebra 1 students had they taken algebra 1 in 6th instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't be too hard to look back over many years of acceleration and see the results for these students, broken down by the performance on entrance tests to this pathway, SOL, MAP, COGAT, grades, etc.

SOL data is public. The 7th grade accelerated cohort has much stronger SOL performance in Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2 than the 8th or 9th grade Algebra 1 cohorts.

Obviously, there are many kids who should be accelerated 2 years and comparing the average test scores of those three populations would reflect that. The question is teasing out which kids (at the bottom of that cohort) would have been better served with just 1 year acceleration.

What % of those kids struggling is acceptable? How much would they benefit by getting another year of foundation skills?

The objective of raising the bar for placement is to improve outcomes for the kids on the cusp, which should theoretically increase SOL performance for two of the groups (7th & 8th Algebra 1).

There's also the issue of teasing out which 8th grade algebra 1 students (at the top of the distribution) would have been better served with 2 years of acceleration, and which 7th grade algebra 1 students (at the middle to top of the distribution) would have been better served with 3 or more years of acceleration.

3 + years should be the rare exception.

Why? Given how much better 7th grade algebra 1 students do than 9th or 8th grade algebra 1 students, it's clear that many of them likely would have been at least as successful as 9th or 8th grade algebra 1 students had they taken algebra 1 in 6th instead.

I have a student as you describe; one of a handful in MS for whom math is incredibly easy. (And top scores etc 99% every time.)

I do not support accelerating children to geometry in 7th.

I see a tremendous disservice done by APS to these accelerated kids. Covering lots of material but at a very superficial level.

The depth of the math could be significantly more rigorous. Children need a much deeper understanding of the topics. A much stronger foundation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, they base math placement completely on test scores (& the cut-offs have changed multiple times over the years). They say they talk to the 5th grade math teacher, but I’m skeptical.
Just know that APS policy is that you CAN parent place, but they will not tell you this explicitly. We had to fight to get my kid into algebra in 7th (test scores weren’t quite what they wanted), and it went well. Kid is currently doing well in algebra II in 9th.
I don’t think extra math classes are necessary, but you could review some things with your child this summer if you’re concerned.

To what extent does parent placing apply? I assume you can't parent place a 1st grader into prealgebra. Also if parent placing is policy, why did you have to fight to get your kid into 7th grade algebra?

Because I didn’t find out until after the fact that parent placement is the policy, and they initially just told us no. Then they agreed to reconsider after fall math testing (kid started in pre-algebra). After that, they moved him to algebra, where he had to make up a month’s worth of work in a short time, but it was well worth it.

I assume parent placement applies to classes open to kids in that grade, not a first grader taking pre-algebra.

I'm confused - if parent placement is the policy, why did they tell you "no" when you asked to place him into algebra? If you had know earlie, what would you have said / done differently to get hem to say "yes" instead?

I assume because they don’t want parents to know it’s the policy, so they can discourage parent placement? I don’t know.

I don't think it is 100% guaranteed. I know people who tried to parent place and were refused. I think its a case by case basis.

It is an APS Policy: Policy I-7.2.9.31

I can see two ways to counter a parent quoting that;

1. That policy refers to high school, as demonstrated by AP, dual enrollment, and other high school level courses being defined as "advanced courses".

2. "All students who desire enrollment in advanced courses and meet any applicable prerequisites shall be eligible for participation." -> the testing requirements are prerequisites, so if your child didn't meet them, they're not eligible

Yeah, I heard on DCUM that based on that policy that you can just say "my kid belongs in pre-algebra" and it would happen. But when I contacted the middle school, it seemed like they wouldn't have let my son son take pre-algebra if there wasn't a very unusual circumstance. I imagine that if a parent throws enough of a fit they will give in, but I also suspect that how much of a fit a parent must throw depends on the middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, they base math placement completely on test scores (& the cut-offs have changed multiple times over the years). They say they talk to the 5th grade math teacher, but I’m skeptical.
Just know that APS policy is that you CAN parent place, but they will not tell you this explicitly. We had to fight to get my kid into algebra in 7th (test scores weren’t quite what they wanted), and it went well. Kid is currently doing well in algebra II in 9th.
I don’t think extra math classes are necessary, but you could review some things with your child this summer if you’re concerned.

To what extent does parent placing apply? I assume you can't parent place a 1st grader into prealgebra. Also if parent placing is policy, why did you have to fight to get your kid into 7th grade algebra?

Because I didn’t find out until after the fact that parent placement is the policy, and they initially just told us no. Then they agreed to reconsider after fall math testing (kid started in pre-algebra). After that, they moved him to algebra, where he had to make up a month’s worth of work in a short time, but it was well worth it.

I assume parent placement applies to classes open to kids in that grade, not a first grader taking pre-algebra.

I'm confused - if parent placement is the policy, why did they tell you "no" when you asked to place him into algebra? If you had know earlie, what would you have said / done differently to get hem to say "yes" instead?

I assume because they don’t want parents to know it’s the policy, so they can discourage parent placement? I don’t know.

I don't think it is 100% guaranteed. I know people who tried to parent place and were refused. I think its a case by case basis.

It is an APS Policy: Policy I-7.2.9.31

I can see two ways to counter a parent quoting that;

1. That policy refers to high school, as demonstrated by AP, dual enrollment, and other high school level courses being defined as "advanced courses".

2. "All students who desire enrollment in advanced courses and meet any applicable prerequisites shall be eligible for participation." -> the testing requirements are prerequisites, so if your child didn't meet them, they're not eligible

You forgot to mention the next sentence which says that parents can override the prerequisites and enroll their student in an advanced class. Also, you added the word "high school" to the course description. It doesn't say that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, they base math placement completely on test scores (& the cut-offs have changed multiple times over the years). They say they talk to the 5th grade math teacher, but I’m skeptical.
Just know that APS policy is that you CAN parent place, but they will not tell you this explicitly. We had to fight to get my kid into algebra in 7th (test scores weren’t quite what they wanted), and it went well. Kid is currently doing well in algebra II in 9th.
I don’t think extra math classes are necessary, but you could review some things with your child this summer if you’re concerned.

To what extent does parent placing apply? I assume you can't parent place a 1st grader into prealgebra. Also if parent placing is policy, why did you have to fight to get your kid into 7th grade algebra?

Because I didn’t find out until after the fact that parent placement is the policy, and they initially just told us no. Then they agreed to reconsider after fall math testing (kid started in pre-algebra). After that, they moved him to algebra, where he had to make up a month’s worth of work in a short time, but it was well worth it.

I assume parent placement applies to classes open to kids in that grade, not a first grader taking pre-algebra.

I'm confused - if parent placement is the policy, why did they tell you "no" when you asked to place him into algebra? If you had know earlie, what would you have said / done differently to get hem to say "yes" instead?

I assume because they don’t want parents to know it’s the policy, so they can discourage parent placement? I don’t know.

I don't think it is 100% guaranteed. I know people who tried to parent place and were refused. I think its a case by case basis.

It is an APS Policy: Policy I-7.2.9.31

I can see two ways to counter a parent quoting that;

1. That policy refers to high school, as demonstrated by AP, dual enrollment, and other high school level courses being defined as "advanced courses".

2. "All students who desire enrollment in advanced courses and meet any applicable prerequisites shall be eligible for participation." -> the testing requirements are prerequisites, so if your child didn't meet them, they're not eligible

Yeah, I heard on DCUM that based on that policy that you can just say "my kid belongs in pre-algebra" and it would happen. But when I contacted the middle school, it seemed like they wouldn't have let my son son take pre-algebra if there wasn't a very unusual circumstance. I imagine that if a parent throws enough of a fit they will give in, but I also suspect that how much of a fit a parent must throw depends on the middle school.

I’m PP, and I didn’t throw a fit. I just put it in writing as direction from my spouse and me. Also, just so you know, the course request forms that teachers sign off on—-as a parent, you can override those too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, they base math placement completely on test scores (& the cut-offs have changed multiple times over the years). They say they talk to the 5th grade math teacher, but I’m skeptical.
Just know that APS policy is that you CAN parent place, but they will not tell you this explicitly. We had to fight to get my kid into algebra in 7th (test scores weren’t quite what they wanted), and it went well. Kid is currently doing well in algebra II in 9th.
I don’t think extra math classes are necessary, but you could review some things with your child this summer if you’re concerned.

To what extent does parent placing apply? I assume you can't parent place a 1st grader into prealgebra. Also if parent placing is policy, why did you have to fight to get your kid into 7th grade algebra?

Because I didn’t find out until after the fact that parent placement is the policy, and they initially just told us no. Then they agreed to reconsider after fall math testing (kid started in pre-algebra). After that, they moved him to algebra, where he had to make up a month’s worth of work in a short time, but it was well worth it.

I assume parent placement applies to classes open to kids in that grade, not a first grader taking pre-algebra.

I'm confused - if parent placement is the policy, why did they tell you "no" when you asked to place him into algebra? If you had know earlie, what would you have said / done differently to get hem to say "yes" instead?

I assume because they don’t want parents to know it’s the policy, so they can discourage parent placement? I don’t know.

I don't think it is 100% guaranteed. I know people who tried to parent place and were refused. I think its a case by case basis.

It is an APS Policy: Policy I-7.2.9.31

I can see two ways to counter a parent quoting that;

1. That policy refers to high school, as demonstrated by AP, dual enrollment, and other high school level courses being defined as "advanced courses".

2. "All students who desire enrollment in advanced courses and meet any applicable prerequisites shall be eligible for participation." -> the testing requirements are prerequisites, so if your child didn't meet them, they're not eligible

Yeah, I heard on DCUM that based on that policy that you can just say "my kid belongs in pre-algebra" and it would happen. But when I contacted the middle school, it seemed like they wouldn't have let my son son take pre-algebra if there wasn't a very unusual circumstance. I imagine that if a parent throws enough of a fit they will give in, but I also suspect that how much of a fit a parent must throw depends on the middle school.

I’m PP, and I didn’t throw a fit. I just put it in writing as direction from my spouse and me. Also, just so you know, the course request forms that teachers sign off on—-as a parent, you can override those too.

I'm PP and I didn't throw a fit either, I was just surprised that it wasn't an automatic yes like I thought it would be based on what DCUM said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't be too hard to look back over many years of acceleration and see the results for these students, broken down by the performance on entrance tests to this pathway, SOL, MAP, COGAT, grades, etc.

SOL data is public. The 7th grade accelerated cohort has much stronger SOL performance in Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2 than the 8th or 9th grade Algebra 1 cohorts.

Obviously, there are many kids who should be accelerated 2 years and comparing the average test scores of those three populations would reflect that. The question is teasing out which kids (at the bottom of that cohort) would have been better served with just 1 year acceleration.

What % of those kids struggling is acceptable? How much would they benefit by getting another year of foundation skills?

The objective of raising the bar for placement is to improve outcomes for the kids on the cusp, which should theoretically increase SOL performance for two of the groups (7th & 8th Algebra 1).

There's also the issue of teasing out which 8th grade algebra 1 students (at the top of the distribution) would have been better served with 2 years of acceleration, and which 7th grade algebra 1 students (at the middle to top of the distribution) would have been better served with 3 or more years of acceleration.

3 + years should be the rare exception.

Why? Given how much better 7th grade algebra 1 students do than 9th or 8th grade algebra 1 students, it's clear that many of them likely would have been at least as successful as 9th or 8th grade algebra 1 students had they taken algebra 1 in 6th instead.

Aside from the true math prodigies there is very little benefit. Race to nowhere.