Compacted math optional?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Forgot to include in PP - goal is to have an engaged child who is learning in math - rather than a sad, disappointed child that loves math but doesn't get anything out of "math class"

Then you need to supplement. Really. I mean this seriously. MCPS cannot be all things to all children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I struggle with what should be the right solution here. Fact: There are kids that are just naturally good at math. They just *get* it. These kind of kids would have had more opportunities for challenge before than they do now. In terms of the end goal, I don't need my 9th grader in Calculus, but if he could handle it why limit him These are our future scientists and engineers. Has the move to not accelerate too much swung too far for these kids?

But this is not "The MCPS math curriculum is awful." This is "The MCPS math curriculum does not work for my kid."

I am 11:39, 12:01 and 12:15 - so first I'd like to point out that I didn't say MCPS curriculum was awful. I think the depth and breadth is a good thing.

However I agree that with your statement that it doesn't work for my kid - but it's not just my kid - it doesn't work for many kids. How many kids probably varies a lot by ES. At my school - I am sure there are more than enough kids that it doesn't work for to fill a class (28+) plus some.

The items beyond addition and subtraction in 1st and 2nd are minimal stretch for the kids who "get math". And, yes, the county should be able to meet the needs of these children. They were doing it before - maybe with too much acceleration - but there is no reason they can't reach these kids with the added depth and breadth with "some" acceleration.

[Anonymous]

However I agree that with your statement that it doesn't work for my kid - but it's not just my kid - it doesn't work for many kids. How many kids probably varies a lot by ES. At my school - I am sure there are more than enough kids that it doesn't work for to fill a class (28+) plus some.

The items beyond addition and subtraction in 1st and 2nd are minimal stretch for the kids who "get math". And, yes, the county should be able to meet the needs of these children. They were doing it before - maybe with too much acceleration - but there is no reason they can't reach these kids with the added depth and breadth with "some" acceleration.

This X100.

Let's use swimming as the example. Let's say that MCPS teaches swimming as a core subject the way that they teach math. For K, kids are only allowed to sit on the edge and dangle their feet in the water. In 1st grade, they can stand in the water, with lots of edge sitting for practice in case they didn't get it in K. In 2nd grade, they are allowed to float on a device and put their face in the water at the end. In 3rd grade, they do everything they did in K-2 and are allowed to practice arm strokes..but not while swimming..just the arm motions. They are then forced to get out of the water and write an essay about how the arm strokes will help them swim. They are assessed on the quality of what they wrote not whether they swim or sink. 10% of the kids are allowed to take a quasi-accelerated course in 4th/5th grade where they will learn to doggie paddle and do 2 additional strokes. They will be allowed to take their feet off the pool floor. Everyone else repeats 3rd grade for 4th grade and then gets to doggie paddle in 5th grade.

The swimming curriculum is designed this way because the school is only assessed on whether all kids can meet the goals. It doesn't matter that no one can swim. It doesn't matter that kids think swimming is boring and not fun. Parents with kids who are afraid of the water will be fine. Parents that don't care whether their kid learns to swim will be fine.

Other parents will say forget this and put their kids in outside swimming classes. Their kids will be bored dangling their toes in the water but this is viewed as not an MCPS problem. If you didn't want your kid to bored you should not have let him learn anything!!

[Anonymous]

But math is not swimming.

And MCPS is not teaching math based on "we will only teach as much as all of the children can learn, and not one bit more".

And if you assume that the only parents happy with K-3 math are parents who are afraid of math and parents who don't care whether their kid learns math -- you're wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I am 11:39, 12:01 and 12:15 - so first I'd like to point out that I didn't say MCPS curriculum was awful. I think the depth and breadth is a good thing.

However I agree that with your statement that it doesn't work for my kid - but it's not just my kid - it doesn't work for many kids. How many kids probably varies a lot by ES. At my school - I am sure there are more than enough kids that it doesn't work for to fill a class (28+) plus some.

The items beyond addition and subtraction in 1st and 2nd are minimal stretch for the kids who "get math". And, yes, the county should be able to meet the needs of these children. They were doing it before - maybe with too much acceleration - but there is no reason they can't reach these kids with the added depth and breadth with "some" acceleration.

What percent of kids "get math"? 5%? 10%? 25%? Obviously I don't know your school, let alone the kids at your school. But assuming that 10% of kids "get math", for there to be enough kids to fill a class of 28, there would have to be 280 kids per grade in your school. That's a really big elementary school, even by MCPS standards.

[Anonymous]

To make the swimming analogy work, you have to add in that all/many children are competing for spots on National swimming teams at the end of 12th grade. Real Estate values/taxes rest on the ability of a school to place their kids on these teams. That makes the schools work harder..

[Anonymous]

We have a large ES and I'd say that easily a third of our students could work at a faster pace in k-3 math than the county provides. much faster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have a large ES and I'd say that easily a third of our students could work at a faster pace in k-3 math than the county provides. much faster.

So now we're not talking about kids who "get math"; we're talking about kids who are just regular smart kids, since I think it's unlikely that a third of kids, even in the most academic parts of Montgomery County, are naturally exceptionally talented at math.

And here's the thing: MCPS has already tried math acceleration for just regular smart kids in lower elementary school, and decided that it didn't work.

[Anonymous]

The math standards are lower, much lower. This is the problem. Its not gifted geniuses who aren't learning new things, its every darn kid in the class. You have to be a ill formed, sheep to go along with the MCPS BS on math. If MCPS started making 3rd graders read Biscuit books everyday, you'd be up in arms too.

The problem is worse in areas with strong preschools. The Montessori schools in our area teach quantity, place value, addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division for kids ages 3-6. These kids are not math geniuses and they aren't just memorizing facts and formulas. In fact, Montessori uses manipulative models and teaches concepts far deeper than anything we've seen from MCPS. The play based preschools teach math too and while they may not do set counting and multiplication/division they do give kids a strong understanding of addition and subtraction. These kids enter MCPS and go back to what they were doing when they were 3 or 4 years old. It progresses incredibly slowing from that point onward.

For whatever reason. Montgomery County has decided that either its children can't learn math or its teacher cant teach it , so everyone is forced to take remedial math from day one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a large ES and I'd say that easily a third of our students could work at a faster pace in k-3 math than the county provides. much faster.

So now we're not talking about kids who "get math"; we're talking about kids who are just regular smart kids, since I think it's unlikely that a third of kids, even in the most academic parts of Montgomery County, are naturally exceptionally talented at math.

And here's the thing: MCPS has already tried math acceleration for just regular smart kids in lower elementary school, and decided that it didn't work.[/quote] They decided it didn't work to the extreme they were allowing - there is a lot of room between NO accleration and what they had before and considered to be too much acceleration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a large ES and I'd say that easily a third of our students could work at a faster pace in k-3 math than the county provides. much faster.

So now we're not talking about kids who "get math"; we're talking about kids who are just regular smart kids, since I think it's unlikely that a third of kids, even in the most academic parts of Montgomery County, are naturally exceptionally talented at math.

And here's the thing: MCPS has already tried math acceleration for just regular smart kids in lower elementary school, and decided that it didn't work.[/quote] They decided it didn't work to the extreme they were allowing - there is a lot of room between NO accleration and what they had before and considered to be too much acceleration.

cleaning up the last post...

They decided it didn't work to the extreme they were allowing - there is a lot of room between NO accleration and what they had before and considered to be too much acceleration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

However I agree that with your statement that it doesn't work for my kid - but it's not just my kid - it doesn't work for many kids. How many kids probably varies a lot by ES. At my school - I am sure there are more than enough kids that it doesn't work for to fill a class (28+) plus some.

The items beyond addition and subtraction in 1st and 2nd are minimal stretch for the kids who "get math". And, yes, the county should be able to meet the needs of these children. They were doing it before - maybe with too much acceleration - but there is no reason they can't reach these kids with the added depth and breadth with "some" acceleration.

This X100.

Let's use swimming as the example. Let's say that MCPS teaches swimming as a core subject the way that they teach math. For K, kids are only allowed to sit on the edge and dangle their feet in the water. In 1st grade, they can stand in the water, with lots of edge sitting for practice in case they didn't get it in K. In 2nd grade, they are allowed to float on a device and put their face in the water at the end. In 3rd grade, they do everything they did in K-2 and are allowed to practice arm strokes..but not while swimming..just the arm motions. They are then forced to get out of the water and write an essay about how the arm strokes will help them swim. They are assessed on the quality of what they wrote not whether they swim or sink. 10% of the kids are allowed to take a quasi-accelerated course in 4th/5th grade where they will learn to doggie paddle and do 2 additional strokes. They will be allowed to take their feet off the pool floor. Everyone else repeats 3rd grade for 4th grade and then gets to doggie paddle in 5th grade.

The swimming curriculum is designed this way because the school is only assessed on whether all kids can meet the goals. It doesn't matter that no one can swim. It doesn't matter that kids think swimming is boring and not fun. Parents with kids who are afraid of the water will be fine. Parents that don't care whether their kid learns to swim will be fine.

Other parents will say forget this and put their kids in outside swimming classes. Their kids will be bored dangling their toes in the water but this is viewed as not an MCPS problem. If you didn't want your kid to bored you should not have let him learn anything!!

Loved especially "getting out of the water and writing an essay about it"

[Anonymous]

And here's the thing: MCPS has already tried math acceleration for just regular smart kids in lower elementary school, and decided that it didn't work.

No one in MCPS ever proved that math acceleration did not work for basic, normal smart kids. MCPS decided that it didn't care about normal, smart kids. MCPS cares about lowering the achievement gap and getting as many kids to hit the bottom bar of the PARRC assessments. If you offer appropriate acceleration, you widen the achievement gap as its recorded in your school. The only way to reduce the gap without allocating more resources to the address kids falling off the bottom is to stop teaching the middle to progress.

[Anonymous]

No one in MCPS ever proved that math acceleration did not work for basic, normal smart kids. MCPS decided that it didn't care about normal, smart kids. MCPS cares about lowering the achievement gap and getting as many kids to hit the bottom bar of the PARRC assessments. If you offer appropriate acceleration, you widen the achievement gap as its recorded in your school. The only way to reduce the gap without allocating more resources to the address kids falling off the bottom is to stop teaching the middle to progress.

I am not going to refute that "lowering the gap" may be a potential issue and contributor - I have no idea.

But I think there has been documented concern in academic circles - including colleges - that math was being accelerated too fast for some kids. That some of them were smart enough to just memorize algorithms and not were not really understanding material - or were memorizing too much to retain it for later.

I say this as the PP who has been advocating for more.... and as one whose child would not fit the memorizing category but really understands math and would have been fine under the old policy.

[Anonymous]

So MCPS has stopped caring about SAT scores and AP pass rates which according to the descriptions above shatter to nothing based on this miserable start to math.