Algebra 1 in 6th grade, followed by normal pace

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common concern raised by equity proponents is that HS students may not be learning Calculus as thoroughly as they should. Instead, statistics is suggested as a better choice since students tend to learn it better in HS. Math educators who support equity efforts argue that postponing Calculus until college could lead to a more proficient learning experience. A big benefit of not allowing calculus enrollment in high school is it immediately addresses the math equity gap that is caused by Calculus students graduating HS with two additional math years compared to those who complete HS with just Algebra 2.

There is a whole segment of academic researchers and teachers who have buried their head into equity philosophy, and generate virtue signaling content all over the internet, justifying lower and slower math is better for everyone, including advanced students. But data proves them wrong. HS students that enroll in Calc BC have shown they are more than capable of mastering Calculus than the apparently easier Statistics.

+1. People keep insisting that kids' brains are "not ready" for Algebra when they're younger, and that they will have gaps in their understanding or struggle in later math classes. If the data actually supported this idea, they might have a point in pushing a slower track. The AP Calc and SOL data pretty convincingly show that the accelerated kids are more than capable of handling their accelerated path.

Parents here are very oddly competitive about math level, and it seems like everyone wants the highest available level to be the one that their kid is taking. The parents of kids who didn't qualify for 7th grade Algebra want to restrict other kids from taking it or want to redefine math levels such that their kids are just as smart and capable as the more accelerated kids. The parents of the 7th grade Algebra kids act like it's absurd for anyone to access 6th or even 5th grade Algebra. It makes sense that people don't want their kids to look worse on paper than kids who are more advanced. It's sad, though, to be so petty as to try to hold other kids back just because their own kids aren't ready for more acceleration.

DP. I am not one of the posters you are referring to since I have not posted that on this thread but I have heard it from knowledgeable, experienced math teachers. The same is true for learning to read, fwiw, some kids are ready young and some kids are ready at the usual time and a few kids late - but generally if you try to teach a child too early, you only frustrate them and yourself. Same for math, although you don't seem to believe that.

PP here. I do agree that teaching math too early is a problem. For Algebra, some PPs and math teachers define “too early” as 6th grade or 7th grade. I define it as “the kid hasn’t yet mastered pre-Algebra.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common concern raised by equity proponents is that HS students may not be learning Calculus as thoroughly as they should. Instead, statistics is suggested as a better choice since students tend to learn it better in HS. Math educators who support equity efforts argue that postponing Calculus until college could lead to a more proficient learning experience. A big benefit of not allowing calculus enrollment in high school is it immediately addresses the math equity gap that is caused by Calculus students graduating HS with two additional math years compared to those who complete HS with just Algebra 2.

There is a whole segment of academic researchers and teachers who have buried their head into equity philosophy, and generate virtue signaling content all over the internet, justifying lower and slower math is better for everyone, including advanced students. But data proves them wrong. HS students that enroll in Calc BC have shown they are more than capable of mastering Calculus than the apparently easier Statistics.

+1. People keep insisting that kids' brains are "not ready" for Algebra when they're younger, and that they will have gaps in their understanding or struggle in later math classes. If the data actually supported this idea, they might have a point in pushing a slower track. The AP Calc and SOL data pretty convincingly show that the accelerated kids are more than capable of handling their accelerated path.

Parents here are very oddly competitive about math level, and it seems like everyone wants the highest available level to be the one that their kid is taking. The parents of kids who didn't qualify for 7th grade Algebra want to restrict other kids from taking it or want to redefine math levels such that their kids are just as smart and capable as the more accelerated kids. The parents of the 7th grade Algebra kids act like it's absurd for anyone to access 6th or even 5th grade Algebra. It makes sense that people don't want their kids to look worse on paper than kids who are more advanced. It's sad, though, to be so petty as to try to hold other kids back just because their own kids aren't ready for more acceleration.

DP. I am not one of the posters you are referring to since I have not posted that on this thread but I have heard it from knowledgeable, experienced math teachers. The same is true for learning to read, fwiw, some kids are ready young and some kids are ready at the usual time and a few kids late - but generally if you try to teach a child too early, you only frustrate them and yourself. Same for math, although you don't seem to believe that.

They're not ready for algebram , and they insert algebra concepts into earlier and earlier grades. Slope and graphing is taught in 5th and 6th grade now. Solving algebraic equations starts in 1st grade; they just use shapes for the variables.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common concern raised by equity proponents is that HS students may not be learning Calculus as thoroughly as they should. Instead, statistics is suggested as a better choice since students tend to learn it better in HS. Math educators who support equity efforts argue that postponing Calculus until college could lead to a more proficient learning experience. A big benefit of not allowing calculus enrollment in high school is it immediately addresses the math equity gap that is caused by Calculus students graduating HS with two additional math years compared to those who complete HS with just Algebra 2.

There is a whole segment of academic researchers and teachers who have buried their head into equity philosophy, and generate virtue signaling content all over the internet, justifying lower and slower math is better for everyone, including advanced students. But data proves them wrong. HS students that enroll in Calc BC have shown they are more than capable of mastering Calculus than the apparently easier Statistics.

+1. People keep insisting that kids' brains are "not ready" for Algebra when they're younger, and that they will have gaps in their understanding or struggle in later math classes. If the data actually supported this idea, they might have a point in pushing a slower track. The AP Calc and SOL data pretty convincingly show that the accelerated kids are more than capable of handling their accelerated path.

Parents here are very oddly competitive about math level, and it seems like everyone wants the highest available level to be the one that their kid is taking. The parents of kids who didn't qualify for 7th grade Algebra want to restrict other kids from taking it or want to redefine math levels such that their kids are just as smart and capable as the more accelerated kids. The parents of the 7th grade Algebra kids act like it's absurd for anyone to access 6th or even 5th grade Algebra. It makes sense that people don't want their kids to look worse on paper than kids who are more advanced. It's sad, though, to be so petty as to try to hold other kids back just because their own kids aren't ready for more acceleration.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common concern raised by equity proponents is that HS students may not be learning Calculus as thoroughly as they should. Instead, statistics is suggested as a better choice since students tend to learn it better in HS. Math educators who support equity efforts argue that postponing Calculus until college could lead to a more proficient learning experience. A big benefit of not allowing calculus enrollment in high school is it immediately addresses the math equity gap that is caused by Calculus students graduating HS with two additional math years compared to those who complete HS with just Algebra 2.

There is a whole segment of academic researchers and teachers who have buried their head into equity philosophy, and generate virtue signaling content all over the internet, justifying lower and slower math is better for everyone, including advanced students. But data proves them wrong. HS students that enroll in Calc BC have shown they are more than capable of mastering Calculus than the apparently easier Statistics.

+1. People keep insisting that kids' brains are "not ready" for Algebra when they're younger, and that they will have gaps in their understanding or struggle in later math classes. If the data actually supported this idea, they might have a point in pushing a slower track. The AP Calc and SOL data pretty convincingly show that the accelerated kids are more than capable of handling their accelerated path.

Parents here are very oddly competitive about math level, and it seems like everyone wants the highest available level to be the one that their kid is taking. The parents of kids who didn't qualify for 7th grade Algebra want to restrict other kids from taking it or want to redefine math levels such that their kids are just as smart and capable as the more accelerated kids. The parents of the 7th grade Algebra kids act like it's absurd for anyone to access 6th or even 5th grade Algebra. It makes sense that people don't want their kids to look worse on paper than kids who are more advanced. It's sad, though, to be so petty as to try to hold other kids back just because their own kids aren't ready for more acceleration.

DP. I am not one of the posters you are referring to since I have not posted that on this thread but I have heard it from knowledgeable, experienced math teachers. The same is true for learning to read, fwiw, some kids are ready young and some kids are ready at the usual time and a few kids late - but generally if you try to teach a child too early, you only frustrate them and yourself. Same for math, although you don't seem to believe that.

They're not ready for algebram , and they insert algebra concepts into earlier and earlier grades. Slope and graphing is taught in 5th and 6th grade now. Solving algebraic equations starts in 1st grade; they just use shapes for the variables.

It's amazing whet bits andpieces they put together to push toward algebra. My older one is instinctively mathy and just went right to regular algebra in elementary school.

My younger one in 6th has learned plotting points and line segments on an xy-graph,
90° rotations,
reflections,
integer translations,
and calculating slope of a line,
and graphing inequalities on a number line,
but still didn't know what a "function" is or how to xy-graph one until I explained it yesterday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common concern raised by equity proponents is that HS students may not be learning Calculus as thoroughly as they should. Instead, statistics is suggested as a better choice since students tend to learn it better in HS. Math educators who support equity efforts argue that postponing Calculus until college could lead to a more proficient learning experience. A big benefit of not allowing calculus enrollment in high school is it immediately addresses the math equity gap that is caused by Calculus students graduating HS with two additional math years compared to those who complete HS with just Algebra 2.

There is a whole segment of academic researchers and teachers who have buried their head into equity philosophy, and generate virtue signaling content all over the internet, justifying lower and slower math is better for everyone, including advanced students. But data proves them wrong. HS students that enroll in Calc BC have shown they are more than capable of mastering Calculus than the apparently easier Statistics.

+1. People keep insisting that kids' brains are "not ready" for Algebra when they're younger, and that they will have gaps in their understanding or struggle in later math classes. If the data actually supported this idea, they might have a point in pushing a slower track. The AP Calc and SOL data pretty convincingly show that the accelerated kids are more than capable of handling their accelerated path.

Parents here are very oddly competitive about math level, and it seems like everyone wants the highest available level to be the one that their kid is taking. The parents of kids who didn't qualify for 7th grade Algebra want to restrict other kids from taking it or want to redefine math levels such that their kids are just as smart and capable as the more accelerated kids. The parents of the 7th grade Algebra kids act like it's absurd for anyone to access 6th or even 5th grade Algebra. It makes sense that people don't want their kids to look worse on paper than kids who are more advanced. It's sad, though, to be so petty as to try to hold other kids back just because their own kids aren't ready for more acceleration.

Hey, some of us, Team Redshirt, want the lowest level to be the one our kid is taking, so other kids can't juice their GPA with easier classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common concern raised by equity proponents is that HS students may not be learning Calculus as thoroughly as they should. Instead, statistics is suggested as a better choice since students tend to learn it better in HS. Math educators who support equity efforts argue that postponing Calculus until college could lead to a more proficient learning experience. A big benefit of not allowing calculus enrollment in high school is it immediately addresses the math equity gap that is caused by Calculus students graduating HS with two additional math years compared to those who complete HS with just Algebra 2.

There is a whole segment of academic researchers and teachers who have buried their head into equity philosophy, and generate virtue signaling content all over the internet, justifying lower and slower math is better for everyone, including advanced students. But data proves them wrong. HS students that enroll in Calc BC have shown they are more than capable of mastering Calculus than the apparently easier Statistics.

+1. People keep insisting that kids' brains are "not ready" for Algebra when they're younger, and that they will have gaps in their understanding or struggle in later math classes. If the data actually supported this idea, they might have a point in pushing a slower track. The AP Calc and SOL data pretty convincingly show that the accelerated kids are more than capable of handling their accelerated path.

Parents here are very oddly competitive about math level, and it seems like everyone wants the highest available level to be the one that their kid is taking. The parents of kids who didn't qualify for 7th grade Algebra want to restrict other kids from taking it or want to redefine math levels such that their kids are just as smart and capable as the more accelerated kids. The parents of the 7th grade Algebra kids act like it's absurd for anyone to access 6th or even 5th grade Algebra. It makes sense that people don't want their kids to look worse on paper than kids who are more advanced. It's sad, though, to be so petty as to try to hold other kids back just because their own kids aren't ready for more acceleration.

DP. I am not one of the posters you are referring to since I have not posted that on this thread but I have heard it from knowledgeable, experienced math teachers. The same is true for learning to read, fwiw, some kids are ready young and some kids are ready at the usual time and a few kids late - but generally if you try to teach a child too early, you only frustrate them and yourself. Same for math, although you don't seem to believe that.

PP here. I do agree that teaching math too early is a problem. For Algebra, some PPs and math teachers define “too early” as 6th grade or 7th grade. I define it as “the kid hasn’t yet mastered pre-Algebra.”

PP (DP) here. My point was that it is developmental, not that the prior requisite knowledge has not yet been taught or mastered. As you watch kids grow and mature, you see that many things come and go at developmental stages that occur at roughly the same time among children, sometimes earlier and sometimes later for kids but usually in a known and predictable window.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In addition to statistics, data science is an alternative to calculus. FCPS has Data Science 1 & 2, but offered only at few schools like Falls Church HS

It is better to take Statistics after calculus. AP classes are supposedly algebra based, but they miss the underlying fundamentals.

What is covered in Data science that’s not in other math classes?

Data Science is a great option for kids who want more math but are not interested in calculus, which is most of the population. . I had Algebra, Geometry, and Algebra II in high school. I didn’t take a math my senior year. I have never had calculus but I have a PhD. I have used and taught advanced statistics without ever having calculus.

What topics are "advanced statistics" ?

When did you do your PhD?

Regression, Logit, Probit, Simultaneous Equations, and other statistical methodologies. You can learn when and how to use different techniques without being able to prove them. Sage Publication has a great series of books that walks through various techniques that discuss when to use them, how to use them, the diagnostics to check that there is not an issue with your data, and how to correct your data if there is an issue. The books include the proofs and explain the proofs but you can skip that to get to the how to use the method properly.

Probability and stats can be understood and used without calculus. Plenty of fields in academics don’t require calculus. The people in the AAP forum tend to be fully locked into STEM that they don’t understand that most fields don’t require calculus. Most kids don’t take it because it is a hard class and they don’t like math that much.

There are many successful career paths in life that don’t require calculus.

I can't help but notice that you skipped my questions. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and ask again:

Do you know how to get a distribution given its CDF, or vice versa? Do you know what a moment generating function is? What field is your PhD in?

"The books include the proofs and explain the proofs but you can skip that to get to the how to use the method properly." - you can't make this stuff up, can you?

I put the data into the computer and it tells me the result. Even easier now with ChatGPT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common concern raised by equity proponents is that HS students may not be learning Calculus as thoroughly as they should. Instead, statistics is suggested as a better choice since students tend to learn it better in HS. Math educators who support equity efforts argue that postponing Calculus until college could lead to a more proficient learning experience. A big benefit of not allowing calculus enrollment in high school is it immediately addresses the math equity gap that is caused by Calculus students graduating HS with two additional math years compared to those who complete HS with just Algebra 2.

There is a whole segment of academic researchers and teachers who have buried their head into equity philosophy, and generate virtue signaling content all over the internet, justifying lower and slower math is better for everyone, including advanced students. But data proves them wrong. HS students that enroll in Calc BC have shown they are more than capable of mastering Calculus than the apparently easier Statistics.

+1. People keep insisting that kids' brains are "not ready" for Algebra when they're younger, and that they will have gaps in their understanding or struggle in later math classes. If the data actually supported this idea, they might have a point in pushing a slower track. The AP Calc and SOL data pretty convincingly show that the accelerated kids are more than capable of handling their accelerated path.

Parents here are very oddly competitive about math level, and it seems like everyone wants the highest available level to be the one that their kid is taking. The parents of kids who didn't qualify for 7th grade Algebra want to restrict other kids from taking it or want to redefine math levels such that their kids are just as smart and capable as the more accelerated kids. The parents of the 7th grade Algebra kids act like it's absurd for anyone to access 6th or even 5th grade Algebra. It makes sense that people don't want their kids to look worse on paper than kids who are more advanced. It's sad, though, to be so petty as to try to hold other kids back just because their own kids aren't ready for more acceleration.

DP. I am not one of the posters you are referring to since I have not posted that on this thread but I have heard it from knowledgeable, experienced math teachers. The same is true for learning to read, fwiw, some kids are ready young and some kids are ready at the usual time and a few kids late - but generally if you try to teach a child too early, you only frustrate them and yourself. Same for math, although you don't seem to believe that.

PP here. I do agree that teaching math too early is a problem. For Algebra, some PPs and math teachers define “too early” as 6th grade or 7th grade. I define it as “the kid hasn’t yet mastered pre-Algebra.”

PP (DP) here. My point was that it is developmental, not that the prior requisite knowledge has not yet been taught or mastered. As you watch kids grow and mature, you see that many things come and go at developmental stages that occur at roughly the same time among children, sometimes earlier and sometimes later for kids but usually in a known and predictable window.

"Usually" means the window in the middle, ignoring the ends of the bell or other distribution curve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common concern raised by equity proponents is that HS students may not be learning Calculus as thoroughly as they should. Instead, statistics is suggested as a better choice since students tend to learn it better in HS. Math educators who support equity efforts argue that postponing Calculus until college could lead to a more proficient learning experience. A big benefit of not allowing calculus enrollment in high school is it immediately addresses the math equity gap that is caused by Calculus students graduating HS with two additional math years compared to those who complete HS with just Algebra 2.

There is a whole segment of academic researchers and teachers who have buried their head into equity philosophy, and generate virtue signaling content all over the internet, justifying lower and slower math is better for everyone, including advanced students. But data proves them wrong. HS students that enroll in Calc BC have shown they are more than capable of mastering Calculus than the apparently easier Statistics.

+1. People keep insisting that kids' brains are "not ready" for Algebra when they're younger, and that they will have gaps in their understanding or struggle in later math classes. If the data actually supported this idea, they might have a point in pushing a slower track. The AP Calc and SOL data pretty convincingly show that the accelerated kids are more than capable of handling their accelerated path.

Parents here are very oddly competitive about math level, and it seems like everyone wants the highest available level to be the one that their kid is taking. The parents of kids who didn't qualify for 7th grade Algebra want to restrict other kids from taking it or want to redefine math levels such that their kids are just as smart and capable as the more accelerated kids. The parents of the 7th grade Algebra kids act like it's absurd for anyone to access 6th or even 5th grade Algebra. It makes sense that people don't want their kids to look worse on paper than kids who are more advanced. It's sad, though, to be so petty as to try to hold other kids back just because their own kids aren't ready for more acceleration.

DP. I am not one of the posters you are referring to since I have not posted that on this thread but I have heard it from knowledgeable, experienced math teachers. The same is true for learning to read, fwiw, some kids are ready young and some kids are ready at the usual time and a few kids late - but generally if you try to teach a child too early, you only frustrate them and yourself. Same for math, although you don't seem to believe that.

PP here. I do agree that teaching math too early is a problem. For Algebra, some PPs and math teachers define “too early” as 6th grade or 7th grade. I define it as “the kid hasn’t yet mastered pre-Algebra.”

PP (DP) here. My point was that it is developmental, not that the prior requisite knowledge has not yet been taught or mastered. As you watch kids grow and mature, you see that many things come and go at developmental stages that occur at roughly the same time among children, sometimes earlier and sometimes later for kids but usually in a known and predictable window.

DP. I roughly agree with the idea that there are levels for things. For example I am firmly convinced that the ability to understand recursion in computer science has some sort of developmental component. However I remain unconvinced that attempting some of these math, engineering, or computing concepts before your brain is fully there is detrimental. As long as you've got the prerequisites (as PP mentioned), if it's a little harder for you to wrap your brain around you just learn the value of hard work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common concern raised by equity proponents is that HS students may not be learning Calculus as thoroughly as they should. Instead, statistics is suggested as a better choice since students tend to learn it better in HS. Math educators who support equity efforts argue that postponing Calculus until college could lead to a more proficient learning experience. A big benefit of not allowing calculus enrollment in high school is it immediately addresses the math equity gap that is caused by Calculus students graduating HS with two additional math years compared to those who complete HS with just Algebra 2.

There is a whole segment of academic researchers and teachers who have buried their head into equity philosophy, and generate virtue signaling content all over the internet, justifying lower and slower math is better for everyone, including advanced students. But data proves them wrong. HS students that enroll in Calc BC have shown they are more than capable of mastering Calculus than the apparently easier Statistics.

+1. People keep insisting that kids' brains are "not ready" for Algebra when they're younger, and that they will have gaps in their understanding or struggle in later math classes. If the data actually supported this idea, they might have a point in pushing a slower track. The AP Calc and SOL data pretty convincingly show that the accelerated kids are more than capable of handling their accelerated path.

Parents here are very oddly competitive about math level, and it seems like everyone wants the highest available level to be the one that their kid is taking. The parents of kids who didn't qualify for 7th grade Algebra want to restrict other kids from taking it or want to redefine math levels such that their kids are just as smart and capable as the more accelerated kids. The parents of the 7th grade Algebra kids act like it's absurd for anyone to access 6th or even 5th grade Algebra. It makes sense that people don't want their kids to look worse on paper than kids who are more advanced. It's sad, though, to be so petty as to try to hold other kids back just because their own kids aren't ready for more acceleration.

DP. I am not one of the posters you are referring to since I have not posted that on this thread but I have heard it from knowledgeable, experienced math teachers. The same is true for learning to read, fwiw, some kids are ready young and some kids are ready at the usual time and a few kids late - but generally if you try to teach a child too early, you only frustrate them and yourself. Same for math, although you don't seem to believe that.

PP here. I do agree that teaching math too early is a problem. For Algebra, some PPs and math teachers define “too early” as 6th grade or 7th grade. I define it as “the kid hasn’t yet mastered pre-Algebra.”

PP (DP) here. My point was that it is developmental, not that the prior requisite knowledge has not yet been taught or mastered. As you watch kids grow and mature, you see that many things come and go at developmental stages that occur at roughly the same time among children, sometimes earlier and sometimes later for kids but usually in a known and predictable window.

PP here. My point is that people are trying to age cap or restrict it based on the typical ages and not the specific developmental stage of the kid. There are people insisting that 6th grade Algebra is too early for anyone, and it shouldn't be allowed. It is true that it's too early for most kids. It's not too early for the kids who have mastered pre-algebra and are ready.

One equity troll is trying to push everyone into 6th grade Algebra. That's absurd. Many other people are questioning the point of letting any kid take 6th grade Algebra and insisting that the kids who do take it aren't ready. The data shows that the small handful of kids who are accelerated are ready and are doing fine. I suspect, though, that most of the people who want to eliminate the 6th grade algebra path in FCPS or who largely succeeded at doing so in LCPS are using the excuse that the kids "aren't ready" because they want to hold back talented kids for equity reasons or to make their own less talented kids look better in comparison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common concern raised by equity proponents is that HS students may not be learning Calculus as thoroughly as they should. Instead, statistics is suggested as a better choice since students tend to learn it better in HS. Math educators who support equity efforts argue that postponing Calculus until college could lead to a more proficient learning experience. A big benefit of not allowing calculus enrollment in high school is it immediately addresses the math equity gap that is caused by Calculus students graduating HS with two additional math years compared to those who complete HS with just Algebra 2.

There is a whole segment of academic researchers and teachers who have buried their head into equity philosophy, and generate virtue signaling content all over the internet, justifying lower and slower math is better for everyone, including advanced students. But data proves them wrong. HS students that enroll in Calc BC have shown they are more than capable of mastering Calculus than the apparently easier Statistics.

+1. People keep insisting that kids' brains are "not ready" for Algebra when they're younger, and that they will have gaps in their understanding or struggle in later math classes. If the data actually supported this idea, they might have a point in pushing a slower track. The AP Calc and SOL data pretty convincingly show that the accelerated kids are more than capable of handling their accelerated path.

Parents here are very oddly competitive about math level, and it seems like everyone wants the highest available level to be the one that their kid is taking. The parents of kids who didn't qualify for 7th grade Algebra want to restrict other kids from taking it or want to redefine math levels such that their kids are just as smart and capable as the more accelerated kids. The parents of the 7th grade Algebra kids act like it's absurd for anyone to access 6th or even 5th grade Algebra. It makes sense that people don't want their kids to look worse on paper than kids who are more advanced. It's sad, though, to be so petty as to try to hold other kids back just because their own kids aren't ready for more acceleration.

DP. I am not one of the posters you are referring to since I have not posted that on this thread but I have heard it from knowledgeable, experienced math teachers. The same is true for learning to read, fwiw, some kids are ready young and some kids are ready at the usual time and a few kids late - but generally if you try to teach a child too early, you only frustrate them and yourself. Same for math, although you don't seem to believe that.

PP here. I do agree that teaching math too early is a problem. For Algebra, some PPs and math teachers define “too early” as 6th grade or 7th grade. I define it as “the kid hasn’t yet mastered pre-Algebra.”

PP (DP) here. My point was that it is developmental, not that the prior requisite knowledge has not yet been taught or mastered. As you watch kids grow and mature, you see that many things come and go at developmental stages that occur at roughly the same time among children, sometimes earlier and sometimes later for kids but usually in a known and predictable window.

The data shows that the 6th grade or earlier Algebra cohort are getting great results on their SOLs and AP tests for higher level math classes. In their case, they would be the kids for whom things come earlier, rather than later. Why hold highly gifted kids back because most other kids aren't ready? I agree that most kids are "roughly" ready for Algebra in 8th grade, give or take a year. In FCPS, out of 14,000 per grade level, around 13,970 take Algebra in 8th grade plus or minus one year. Why are people quibbling about whether it's "too early" for the 30 kids out of 14,000 skimmed off of the top for 6th grade Algebra?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Consider the equity issues that math acceleration creates among high school graduates where one student graduates with Calc BC or Multivariable, and another student finishes just Algebra 2 by senior year. That's an equity gap of 3 to 4 years. If we raise the minimum math for HS graduation to something like a precalculus or calc AB, we would see a lot to high school drop outs. But the advanced math students can easily slow down and graduate with Algebra 2, and instead take other math courses like Statistics or Data Analysis or Math modelling, but stay away from calculus or even precalculus.

Who is doing Algebra 2 senior year? Most high schools require 4 years of math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Consider the equity issues that math acceleration creates among high school graduates where one student graduates with Calc BC or Multivariable, and another student finishes just Algebra 2 by senior year. That's an equity gap of 3 to 4 years. If we raise the minimum math for HS graduation to something like a precalculus or calc AB, we would see a lot to high school drop outs. But the advanced math students can easily slow down and graduate with Algebra 2, and instead take other math courses like Statistics or Data Analysis or Math modelling, but stay away from calculus or even precalculus.

Who is doing Algebra 2 senior year? Most high schools require 4 years of math.

Not everyone is suited for math beyond Algebra 2. Fortunately, FCPS addresses the needs of students who prefer to focus on lower-level math by providing multiple options to graduate with just Algebra 2, minimizing dropouts.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/graduation-requirements-and-course-planning/high-school-course-sequencing/mathematics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common concern raised by equity proponents is that HS students may not be learning Calculus as thoroughly as they should. Instead, statistics is suggested as a better choice since students tend to learn it better in HS. Math educators who support equity efforts argue that postponing Calculus until college could lead to a more proficient learning experience. A big benefit of not allowing calculus enrollment in high school is it immediately addresses the math equity gap that is caused by Calculus students graduating HS with two additional math years compared to those who complete HS with just Algebra 2.

There is a whole segment of academic researchers and teachers who have buried their head into equity philosophy, and generate virtue signaling content all over the internet, justifying lower and slower math is better for everyone, including advanced students. But data proves them wrong. HS students that enroll in Calc BC have shown they are more than capable of mastering Calculus than the apparently easier Statistics.

+1. People keep insisting that kids' brains are "not ready" for Algebra when they're younger, and that they will have gaps in their understanding or struggle in later math classes. If the data actually supported this idea, they might have a point in pushing a slower track. The AP Calc and SOL data pretty convincingly show that the accelerated kids are more than capable of handling their accelerated path.

Parents here are very oddly competitive about math level, and it seems like everyone wants the highest available level to be the one that their kid is taking. The parents of kids who didn't qualify for 7th grade Algebra want to restrict other kids from taking it or want to redefine math levels such that their kids are just as smart and capable as the more accelerated kids. The parents of the 7th grade Algebra kids act like it's absurd for anyone to access 6th or even 5th grade Algebra. It makes sense that people don't want their kids to look worse on paper than kids who are more advanced. It's sad, though, to be so petty as to try to hold other kids back just because their own kids aren't ready for more acceleration.

DP. I am not one of the posters you are referring to since I have not posted that on this thread but I have heard it from knowledgeable, experienced math teachers. The same is true for learning to read, fwiw, some kids are ready young and some kids are ready at the usual time and a few kids late - but generally if you try to teach a child too early, you only frustrate them and yourself. Same for math, although you don't seem to believe that.

PP here. I do agree that teaching math too early is a problem. For Algebra, some PPs and math teachers define “too early” as 6th grade or 7th grade. I define it as “the kid hasn’t yet mastered pre-Algebra.”

PP (DP) here. My point was that it is developmental, not that the prior requisite knowledge has not yet been taught or mastered. As you watch kids grow and mature, you see that many things come and go at developmental stages that occur at roughly the same time among children, sometimes earlier and sometimes later for kids but usually in a known and predictable window.

The data shows that the 6th grade or earlier Algebra cohort are getting great results on their SOLs and AP tests for higher level math classes. In their case, they would be the kids for whom things come earlier, rather than later. Why hold highly gifted kids back because most other kids aren't ready? I agree that most kids are "roughly" ready for Algebra in 8th grade, give or take a year. In FCPS, out of 14,000 per grade level, around 13,970 take Algebra in 8th grade plus or minus one year. Why are people quibbling about whether it's "too early" for the 30 kids out of 14,000 skimmed off of the top for 6th grade Algebra?

If barriers are removed, instead of 30 it would have been 500+ at FCPS, an estimate if it were to follow Loudoun data

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Consider the equity issues that math acceleration creates among high school graduates where one student graduates with Calc BC or Multivariable, and another student finishes just Algebra 2 by senior year. That's an equity gap of 3 to 4 years. If we raise the minimum math for HS graduation to something like a precalculus or calc AB, we would see a lot to high school drop outs. But the advanced math students can easily slow down and graduate with Algebra 2, and instead take other math courses like Statistics or Data Analysis or Math modelling, but stay away from calculus or even precalculus.

Who is doing Algebra 2 senior year? Most high schools require 4 years of math.

Not everyone is suited for math beyond Algebra 2. Fortunately, FCPS addresses the needs of students who prefer to focus on lower-level math by providing multiple options to graduate with just Algebra 2, minimizing dropouts.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/graduation-requirements-and-course-planning/high-school-course-sequencing/mathematics

Virginia only recently started requiring four years of math to graduate. One teacher was arguing against this change in the meeting. It generally got covered as watering down the advanced diploma.