new TJ principal streamlines math courses

[Anonymous]

New principal has been brought in to bring back rigor into TJ coursework.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of RS1 is a great loss. Nobody in math department thinks it is a good idea. But principal did not ask for input. It might be just for the ratings - getting everyone into AP Precalc increases the number of AP courses taken per student. Ratings. Why would TJ student need AP Precalc. No STEM program in any college would count it for credit. Similar changes in Science. Wonderful unique Geosystems gone to be replaced by standard AP Environmental Science. Like in any base school. These are not good changes.

You're misinformed. These changes were thoughtfully implemented by the new principal with input from TJ math teachers, upperclassmen, and alumni parents. You may be getting mixed up with the previous principal, who lacked understanding of TJ's coursework and showed little interest in enhancing academic rigor. In contrast, fortunately, the new principal is a TJ alumnus with extensive STEM teaching and leadership experience.

RS1, as a standalone semester course, lacked a clear purpose. It was a watered down intro to statistics that consumed valuable freshman time, often to their frustration. Now, the basic aspects of RS1 has been integrated into a revamped, two-semester version of the new Math 3.

Previously, students who wanted to pursue RS2 (TJ’s AP Statistics) often found RS1 redundant, noting that its topics were covered in the first few weeks of RS2 anyway. Moreover, neither RS1 nor RS2 provided adequate preparation for RS3, TJ’s advanced statistics course.

This feedback was largely ignored by the previous principal, mostly due to lack of math or stem background. The new principal, however, asked the math department to redesign the statistics sequence. Their suggestion was to convert RS1 into a rigorous, in-depth semester course, with RS2 continuing as the follow-on with ap stats. Together, these now form the revised TJ AP Statistics track.

Rather, I believe it is you who is misinformed. The principal went in with the highly focused idea of putting as many AP courses into the curriculum as he could. He jammed them in as fast as he possibly could without listening to anybody except himself.

I don't think parents or kids are happy with the math department. Show me where we signed on to have to hire teachers to teach our kids math because TJ teachers don't do so?

And before another person cries "rigor" I went to MIT and our Professor Mattuck, aka dropped-acid-with-Nash-at-Princeton, was a phenomenal lecturer. This Curie bullsh&t isn't the way MIT teaches so why would TJ teach this way?

My child is extremely happy with the math department and with each and every one of the math teachers they had a class with. When I attended the back to school night and met the teachers, I was really impressed with many of the teachers and particularly Chemistry, Physics, History and Math teachers. I cannot be more thankful for these teachers.

The teachers thoroughly cover all the concepts and teach them exceptionally well. Some teach exactly like they teach at MIT - those are the words the Physics teacher used who taught at MIT.

If a child needs tutors it is due to one of two reasons:

1. Child is not paying attention in class and/or not doing the follow up homework exercises, or

2. Child is likely not a fit at TJ for any number of reasons.

[Anonymous]

Many Indian parents send their kids to Curie because they want to get the coursework completed ahead of time. The idea is that if you already know the material then TJ becomes manageable. Curie's owner scared and convinced a lot of these parents that without taking classes at them their child would find TJ difficult.

What Curie does is "teach" as in spoon feed the material without making the students think. They do example after example and learn by rote and repetition.

When these kids come to TJ and find any class that they did not take or encounter new material for the first time, they are frozen.

[Anonymous]

Let me give you one example. The way they teach at TJ, they explain concept 1 and do some examples. They explain concept 2 and do some examples. Then the homework has a problem that needs both concept 1 and concept 2 to be applied to solve the problem. If you skip on the assignment, which also requires spending some time thinking through the concepts in more detail, you do not really understand the concepts in a deep way.

In exams and quizzes, you have 20% of the test that requires this type of questions where you need to apply multiple concepts for the solution.

[Anonymous]

This application of a concept in a new situation or combining multiple concepts to solve a problem, is what you do not find at base high schools. You know the concept you get 100%.

That does not work at TJ and that is on purpose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of RS1 is a great loss. Nobody in math department thinks it is a good idea. But principal did not ask for input. It might be just for the ratings - getting everyone into AP Precalc increases the number of AP courses taken per student. Ratings. Why would TJ student need AP Precalc. No STEM program in any college would count it for credit. Similar changes in Science. Wonderful unique Geosystems gone to be replaced by standard AP Environmental Science. Like in any base school. These are not good changes.

You're misinformed. These changes were thoughtfully implemented by the new principal with input from TJ math teachers, upperclassmen, and alumni parents. You may be getting mixed up with the previous principal, who lacked understanding of TJ's coursework and showed little interest in enhancing academic rigor. In contrast, fortunately, the new principal is a TJ alumnus with extensive STEM teaching and leadership experience.

RS1, as a standalone semester course, lacked a clear purpose. It was a watered down intro to statistics that consumed valuable freshman time, often to their frustration. Now, the basic aspects of RS1 has been integrated into a revamped, two-semester version of the new Math 3.

Previously, students who wanted to pursue RS2 (TJ’s AP Statistics) often found RS1 redundant, noting that its topics were covered in the first few weeks of RS2 anyway. Moreover, neither RS1 nor RS2 provided adequate preparation for RS3, TJ’s advanced statistics course.

This feedback was largely ignored by the previous principal, mostly due to lack of math or stem background. The new principal, however, asked the math department to redesign the statistics sequence. Their suggestion was to convert RS1 into a rigorous, in-depth semester course, with RS2 continuing as the follow-on with ap stats. Together, these now form the revised TJ AP Statistics track.

Rather, I believe it is you who is misinformed. The principal went in with the highly focused idea of putting as many AP courses into the curriculum as he could. He jammed them in as fast as he possibly could without listening to anybody except himself.

I don't think parents or kids are happy with the math department. Show me where we signed on to have to hire teachers to teach our kids math because TJ teachers don't do so?

And before another person cries "rigor" I went to MIT and our Professor Mattuck, aka dropped-acid-with-Nash-at-Princeton, was a phenomenal lecturer. This Curie bullsh&t isn't the way MIT teaches so why would TJ teach this way?

My child is extremely happy with the math department and with each and every one of the math teachers they had a class with. When I attended the back to school night and met the teachers, I was really impressed with many of the teachers and particularly Chemistry, Physics, History and Math teachers. I cannot be more thankful for these teachers.

The teachers thoroughly cover all the concepts and teach them exceptionally well. Some teach exactly like they teach at MIT - those are the words the Physics teacher used who taught at MIT.

If a child needs tutors it is due to one of two reasons:

1. Child is not paying attention in class and/or not doing the follow up homework exercises, or

2. Child is likely not a fit at TJ for any number of reasons.

Yes only kids who have spent years in AoPS and RSM need apply.... <sarcasm>

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many Indian parents send their kids to Curie because they want to get the coursework completed ahead of time. The idea is that if you already know the material then TJ becomes manageable. Curie's owner scared and convinced a lot of these parents that without taking classes at them their child would find TJ difficult.

What Curie does is "teach" as in spoon feed the material without making the students think. They do example after example and learn by rote and repetition.

When these kids come to TJ and find any class that they did not take or encounter new material for the first time, they are frozen.

We have been hearing a lot about Curie. How difficult is the Curie curriculum? Other posts say only a fourth survive the entire curriculum.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Math teachers are relieved with the new principal—at least he understands the courses, unlike the previous one. Every change implemented so far has originated from the math faculty and has incorporated feedback from parents and former students.

By understanding the courses, you mean he took similar courses 40 years ago. Every change so far has been to make TJ less exceptional and more like every other public high school. This is also directed by Reid who is misusing equity by believing every high school should offer the same courses, including TJ.

This! Teachers are definitely not happy with the changes, including the math dept. He's turning TJ into a base school. Why would anyone choose to go there now when they can get the same exact classes with less of a commute?

All of the recent math changes were suggested by TJ’s math teachers, and parents were kept in the loop by principal through PTSA briefings.

Just because the principal and the PTSA shared this with parents does not make it true. Ask an actual teacher.

+1
TJ Math teacher

Upset that your are going to have to teach your math classes now?

What a ridiculous comment.

I'm a TJ parent and agree. Except that they have the kids teaching each other half the time so I'm still left wondering what the math teachers do.

My kids teacher apparently had so many kids failing that when my kid was struggling they didn't even bother to reach out. It felt very F - U.

OK. All these anonymous complaints about teachers not teaching are hard to accept. Plenty of students are failing for various reasons that have nothing to do with teachers. At least half of my students don’t complete hw because it is not graded, don’t do corrections properly for assessments, don’t listen to lectures. Then they complain.
But that aside, how replacing sequence of classes would change my teaching style? That is what I found so ridiculous about the post snide.

You're right, it probably wouldn't change the teaching style. If the department has a rotten culture gotta clean house.

In all seriousness, failing students is a reflection of the teacher's inability to teach or arrogance that they want to see kids fail.

So what if the kids get the material, but you're putting questions they've never seen before on the tests? Or a question that even a college graduate in math can't solve because there isn't enough information? Or they are expected to solve problems with long show-work in less than 2 minutes?

Which, BTW, they don't have access to the answers so never actually learn something from the tests.

Failing reflects more then the teachers ability to teach. It reflects a students willingness to do the work and seek help. I doubt that kids who are completing homework, asking for help when they get questions wrong on their homwork, and meeting with teachers to better understand material are failing. They might earn a C or a B because the material is hard for them, although they might earn an A as they figure it out, but I doubt that they would fail.

Kids who are failing are either out of their depth in the class and need to be in a lower level class or, in TJs case, at a different school, or they are not making an effort. I taught. I don't like the method of teaching I am hearing about, with less lecture and more kids working together to figure out how to do the work, but I don't think kids are failing simply because of that method, at least, not in large numbers.

^^THIS

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of RS1 is a great loss. Nobody in math department thinks it is a good idea. But principal did not ask for input. It might be just for the ratings - getting everyone into AP Precalc increases the number of AP courses taken per student. Ratings. Why would TJ student need AP Precalc. No STEM program in any college would count it for credit. Similar changes in Science. Wonderful unique Geosystems gone to be replaced by standard AP Environmental Science. Like in any base school. These are not good changes.

You're misinformed. These changes were thoughtfully implemented by the new principal with input from TJ math teachers, upperclassmen, and alumni parents. You may be getting mixed up with the previous principal, who lacked understanding of TJ's coursework and showed little interest in enhancing academic rigor. In contrast, fortunately, the new principal is a TJ alumnus with extensive STEM teaching and leadership experience.

RS1, as a standalone semester course, lacked a clear purpose. It was a watered down intro to statistics that consumed valuable freshman time, often to their frustration. Now, the basic aspects of RS1 has been integrated into a revamped, two-semester version of the new Math 3.

Previously, students who wanted to pursue RS2 (TJ’s AP Statistics) often found RS1 redundant, noting that its topics were covered in the first few weeks of RS2 anyway. Moreover, neither RS1 nor RS2 provided adequate preparation for RS3, TJ’s advanced statistics course.

This feedback was largely ignored by the previous principal, mostly due to lack of math or stem background. The new principal, however, asked the math department to redesign the statistics sequence. Their suggestion was to convert RS1 into a rigorous, in-depth semester course, with RS2 continuing as the follow-on with ap stats. Together, these now form the revised TJ AP Statistics track.

Rather, I believe it is you who is misinformed. The principal went in with the highly focused idea of putting as many AP courses into the curriculum as he could. He jammed them in as fast as he possibly could without listening to anybody except himself.

I don't think parents or kids are happy with the math department. Show me where we signed on to have to hire teachers to teach our kids math because TJ teachers don't do so?

And before another person cries "rigor" I went to MIT and our Professor Mattuck, aka dropped-acid-with-Nash-at-Princeton, was a phenomenal lecturer. This Curie bullsh&t isn't the way MIT teaches so why would TJ teach this way?

My child is extremely happy with the math department and with each and every one of the math teachers they had a class with. When I attended the back to school night and met the teachers, I was really impressed with many of the teachers and particularly Chemistry, Physics, History and Math teachers. I cannot be more thankful for these teachers.

The teachers thoroughly cover all the concepts and teach them exceptionally well. Some teach exactly like they teach at MIT - those are the words the Physics teacher used who taught at MIT.

If a child needs tutors it is due to one of two reasons:

1. Child is not paying attention in class and/or not doing the follow up homework exercises, or

2. Child is likely not a fit at TJ for any number of reasons.

Yes only kids who have spent years in AoPS and RSM need apply.... <sarcasm>

Those programs pride themselves on teaching this type of thinking. My kid has done both, he does RSM now, and both programs are clear that they include problems that the kids will struggle with so that they learn to ask questions. They problems they work on in class and homework are intentionally multi-step problems. Whether you like it or not, many of the kids applying to TJ have been doing some sort of outside enrichment because they like math and they like science. They have been exposed to this type of thought process, and they don't find it challenging. DS joined his AoPS class halfway into the year during COVID. He didn't miss a step and was on par with the kids who had been in the class all year. This is how his brain works. Parents with kids applying to TJ should know that there are a good number of kids applying with a similar background. They do math competitions and science competitions for fun, and they win or are in the 99th percentile. Those are their peers at TJ. If you are expecting that the school is not aware of that and expecting kids to be at that level, then you are crazy. That is the point of TJ, teaching bright kids who are strong in STEM and interested in STEM. The classes are going to move faster and the expectation is that the kids will pick up the material more quickly.

It sounds like kids who are smart and have not been as focused on STEM outside of school have to work harder, but is that a surprise?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This application of a concept in a new situation or combining multiple concepts to solve a problem, is what you do not find at base high schools. You know the concept you get 100%.

That does not work at TJ and that is on purpose.

Correction:

You don't know the concept, you can still get 100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let me give you one example. The way they teach at TJ, they explain concept 1 and do some examples. They explain concept 2 and do some examples. Then the homework has a problem that needs both concept 1 and concept 2 to be applied to solve the problem. If you skip on the assignment, which also requires spending some time thinking through the concepts in more detail, you do not really understand the concepts in a deep way.

In exams and quizzes, you have 20% of the test that requires this type of questions where you need to apply multiple concepts for the solution.

That's not how my child's class works at TJ. Every class starts with a quiz or exam. So you need to know the material prior to starting the class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So what if the kids get the material, but you're putting questions they've never seen before on the tests?

If this is a problem for you, you definitely do not belong as a student at TJ.

TJ is for the future leaders and inventors, not for memorizer regurgitators. Especially with ChatGPT now, we have no reason to pay to train mindless regurgitators.

So, again, what is the point of teaching if you put material on a test that wasn't actually taught? At that point you're just a test administrator.

I don't have a kid at TJ, hopefully I will in a few years, but I think I understand what is happening.

Teachers write questions that require students to identify how they are supposed to solve the problem and then the students have to solve the problem. Think word problems. Kids are not given an equation to solve or a simple chart to read. They have to read a problem and figure out how they should solve it and then solve it.

There is nothing wrong with that. It is what any kid who does math competitions is doing. I mean, it is what most of us did when we had word problems. I suck at word problems, I hate them, but they are something that tests not only your knowledge of arithmetic but how to apply the material.

Yes and no. They have word problems on every test. That's not the issue.

The issue is when there is a problem that has never appeared in homework, on study guides, in class and it's not able to be solved using the methods they've been taught. It's a new concept suddenly appearing on the final exam.

Or, in another example, the written question doesn't give enough information to solve it. So the teacher wrote a terrible question. Whether they intended to or not. Who knows.

Can you give a single example?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Math teachers are relieved with the new principal—at least he understands the courses, unlike the previous one. Every change implemented so far has originated from the math faculty and has incorporated feedback from parents and former students.

By understanding the courses, you mean he took similar courses 40 years ago. Every change so far has been to make TJ less exceptional and more like every other public high school. This is also directed by Reid who is misusing equity by believing every high school should offer the same courses, including TJ.

This! Teachers are definitely not happy with the changes, including the math dept. He's turning TJ into a base school. Why would anyone choose to go there now when they can get the same exact classes with less of a commute?

All of the recent math changes were suggested by TJ’s math teachers, and parents were kept in the loop by principal through PTSA briefings.

Just because the principal and the PTSA shared this with parents does not make it true. Ask an actual teacher.

+1
TJ Math teacher

Upset that your are going to have to teach your math classes now?

What a ridiculous comment.

I'm a TJ parent and agree. Except that they have the kids teaching each other half the time so I'm still left wondering what the math teachers do.

My kids teacher apparently had so many kids failing that when my kid was struggling they didn't even bother to reach out. It felt very F - U.

OK. All these anonymous complaints about teachers not teaching are hard to accept. Plenty of students are failing for various reasons that have nothing to do with teachers. At least half of my students don’t complete hw because it is not graded, don’t do corrections properly for assessments, don’t listen to lectures. Then they complain.
But that aside, how replacing sequence of classes would change my teaching style? That is what I found so ridiculous about the post snide.

You're right, it probably wouldn't change the teaching style. If the department has a rotten culture gotta clean house.

In all seriousness, failing students is a reflection of the teacher's inability to teach or arrogance that they want to see kids fail.

So what if the kids get the material, but you're putting questions they've never seen before on the tests? Or a question that even a college graduate in math can't solve because there isn't enough information? Or they are expected to solve problems with long show-work in less than 2 minutes?

Which, BTW, they don't have access to the answers so never actually learn something from the tests.

Failing reflects more then the teachers ability to teach. It reflects a students willingness to do the work and seek help. I doubt that kids who are completing homework, asking for help when they get questions wrong on their homwork, and meeting with teachers to better understand material are failing. They might earn a C or a B because the material is hard for them, although they might earn an A as they figure it out, but I doubt that they would fail.

Kids who are failing are either out of their depth in the class and need to be in a lower level class or, in TJs case, at a different school, or they are not making an effort. I taught. I don't like the method of teaching I am hearing about, with less lecture and more kids working together to figure out how to do the work, but I don't think kids are failing simply because of that method, at least, not in large numbers.

I wish you could read what the teacher told me. Which is total comprehension of the material but failure for 1) right answer, not enough work 2) wrong answer, right work to the solution and sees the simple error that caused it 3) not having enough time to complete the questions (typically 2-3min allotted for each). Which, shockingly, if you have to move super fast you're going to have a problem with all 3.

So basically there are many ways to fail in TJ math that have nothing to do with comprehension.

Did your kid fail, due to these issues? Writing incomplete solutions and making arithmethic errors on half the problems, or half the points? 0 credit for a long form answer with partially correct work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of RS1 is a great loss. Nobody in math department thinks it is a good idea. But principal did not ask for input. It might be just for the ratings - getting everyone into AP Precalc increases the number of AP courses taken per student. Ratings. Why would TJ student need AP Precalc. No STEM program in any college would count it for credit. Similar changes in Science. Wonderful unique Geosystems gone to be replaced by standard AP Environmental Science. Like in any base school. These are not good changes.

You're misinformed. These changes were thoughtfully implemented by the new principal with input from TJ math teachers, upperclassmen, and alumni parents. You may be getting mixed up with the previous principal, who lacked understanding of TJ's coursework and showed little interest in enhancing academic rigor. In contrast, fortunately, the new principal is a TJ alumnus with extensive STEM teaching and leadership experience.

RS1, as a standalone semester course, lacked a clear purpose. It was a watered down intro to statistics that consumed valuable freshman time, often to their frustration. Now, the basic aspects of RS1 has been integrated into a revamped, two-semester version of the new Math 3.

Previously, students who wanted to pursue RS2 (TJ’s AP Statistics) often found RS1 redundant, noting that its topics were covered in the first few weeks of RS2 anyway. Moreover, neither RS1 nor RS2 provided adequate preparation for RS3, TJ’s advanced statistics course.

This feedback was largely ignored by the previous principal, mostly due to lack of math or stem background. The new principal, however, asked the math department to redesign the statistics sequence. Their suggestion was to convert RS1 into a rigorous, in-depth semester course, with RS2 continuing as the follow-on with ap stats. Together, these now form the revised TJ AP Statistics track.

Rather, I believe it is you who is misinformed. The principal went in with the highly focused idea of putting as many AP courses into the curriculum as he could. He jammed them in as fast as he possibly could without listening to anybody except himself.

I don't think parents or kids are happy with the math department. Show me where we signed on to have to hire teachers to teach our kids math because TJ teachers don't do so?

And before another person cries "rigor" I went to MIT and our Professor Mattuck, aka dropped-acid-with-Nash-at-Princeton, was a phenomenal lecturer. This Curie bullsh&t isn't the way MIT teaches so why would TJ teach this way?

My child is extremely happy with the math department and with each and every one of the math teachers they had a class with. When I attended the back to school night and met the teachers, I was really impressed with many of the teachers and particularly Chemistry, Physics, History and Math teachers. I cannot be more thankful for these teachers.

The teachers thoroughly cover all the concepts and teach them exceptionally well. Some teach exactly like they teach at MIT - those are the words the Physics teacher used who taught at MIT.

If a child needs tutors it is due to one of two reasons:

1. Child is not paying attention in class and/or not doing the follow up homework exercises, or

2. Child is likely not a fit at TJ for any number of reasons.

Yes only kids who have spent years in AoPS and RSM need apply.... <sarcasm>

Those programs pride themselves on teaching this type of thinking. My kid has done both, he does RSM now, and both programs are clear that they include problems that the kids will struggle with so that they learn to ask questions. They problems they work on in class and homework are intentionally multi-step problems. Whether you like it or not, many of the kids applying to TJ have been doing some sort of outside enrichment because they like math and they like science. They have been exposed to this type of thought process, and they don't find it challenging. DS joined his AoPS class halfway into the year during COVID. He didn't miss a step and was on par with the kids who had been in the class all year. This is how his brain works. Parents with kids applying to TJ should know that there are a good number of kids applying with a similar background. They do math competitions and science competitions for fun, and they win or are in the 99th percentile. Those are their peers at TJ. If you are expecting that the school is not aware of that and expecting kids to be at that level, then you are crazy. That is the point of TJ, teaching bright kids who are strong in STEM and interested in STEM. The classes are going to move faster and the expectation is that the kids will pick up the material more quickly.

It sounds like kids who are smart and have not been as focused on STEM outside of school have to work harder, but is that a surprise?

This is just patently not true. There are a ton of parents in the freshman chat complaining about the math format. You're basically guaranteed to have a C when the quiz format is 4 points. Not everyone at TJ does competitions and that shouldn't be an expectation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of RS1 is a great loss. Nobody in math department thinks it is a good idea. But principal did not ask for input. It might be just for the ratings - getting everyone into AP Precalc increases the number of AP courses taken per student. Ratings. Why would TJ student need AP Precalc. No STEM program in any college would count it for credit. Similar changes in Science. Wonderful unique Geosystems gone to be replaced by standard AP Environmental Science. Like in any base school. These are not good changes.

You're misinformed. These changes were thoughtfully implemented by the new principal with input from TJ math teachers, upperclassmen, and alumni parents. You may be getting mixed up with the previous principal, who lacked understanding of TJ's coursework and showed little interest in enhancing academic rigor. In contrast, fortunately, the new principal is a TJ alumnus with extensive STEM teaching and leadership experience.

RS1, as a standalone semester course, lacked a clear purpose. It was a watered down intro to statistics that consumed valuable freshman time, often to their frustration. Now, the basic aspects of RS1 has been integrated into a revamped, two-semester version of the new Math 3.

Previously, students who wanted to pursue RS2 (TJ’s AP Statistics) often found RS1 redundant, noting that its topics were covered in the first few weeks of RS2 anyway. Moreover, neither RS1 nor RS2 provided adequate preparation for RS3, TJ’s advanced statistics course.

This feedback was largely ignored by the previous principal, mostly due to lack of math or stem background. The new principal, however, asked the math department to redesign the statistics sequence. Their suggestion was to convert RS1 into a rigorous, in-depth semester course, with RS2 continuing as the follow-on with ap stats. Together, these now form the revised TJ AP Statistics track.

Rather, I believe it is you who is misinformed. The principal went in with the highly focused idea of putting as many AP courses into the curriculum as he could. He jammed them in as fast as he possibly could without listening to anybody except himself.

I don't think parents or kids are happy with the math department. Show me where we signed on to have to hire teachers to teach our kids math because TJ teachers don't do so?

And before another person cries "rigor" I went to MIT and our Professor Mattuck, aka dropped-acid-with-Nash-at-Princeton, was a phenomenal lecturer. This Curie bullsh&t isn't the way MIT teaches so why would TJ teach this way?

My child is extremely happy with the math department and with each and every one of the math teachers they had a class with. When I attended the back to school night and met the teachers, I was really impressed with many of the teachers and particularly Chemistry, Physics, History and Math teachers. I cannot be more thankful for these teachers.

The teachers thoroughly cover all the concepts and teach them exceptionally well. Some teach exactly like they teach at MIT - those are the words the Physics teacher used who taught at MIT.

If a child needs tutors it is due to one of two reasons:

1. Child is not paying attention in class and/or not doing the follow up homework exercises, or

2. Child is likely not a fit at TJ for any number of reasons.

You know most kids prepare for class at MIT right?