VDOE - VMPI is dead? Isn't that illegal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

No, they can't. The proposed changes to the curriculum would have gone through an extensive review process, including public feedback (again). They couldn't just sneak in some changes without people noticing.

They hadn't even put out a draft yet. Imagine the feedback they would have gotten after they actually had something concrete.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:VMPI is disastrous for public schools. It’s a very good thing that he is getting rid of it.

To the pp that was lamenting about just buying in a good school district and now going to have to look at private. You should send him an email to thank him. He just saved your good public school.

Why - because blending algebra & geometry and adding data science was really that terrible?

No, because they wanted to put all kids in the same math class until 10th or 11th grade. I hate Youngkin and did not vote for him but I'm glad this is gone.

That idea that was loosely floated (not even on infographic) around a year ago was squashed several months ago. Stop spreading disinformation.

It was actually in the initial proposal as was equity as the #1 goal (not math education), then it was quickly walked back and equity was put further down the list of goals. They were waiting until after the election until releasing the final version. It truly was like a "you have to pass it to find out what's in it". Didn't vote for him, but know a lot of Asian people who did solely for this issue.

You have a problem with VDOE making sure that Virginia's math curriculum isn't leaving certain students behind or unprepared to hold a job?

Of course not. But let’s not leave them behind by devoting resources to help them catch up and be their very best, not by holding advanced kids back.

VMPI would not do that. This was clarified a long time ago, you just don't want to acknowledge it because it guts your best argument against VMPI.

+1

People still “concerned” about advanced math are either not paying attention or have ulterior motives.

Yes, my ulterior motive was making sure my son could get into Algebra early before that opportunity was taken away from him.

LCPS changes weren’t driven by VMPI. You’re blaming VDOE for a decision LCPS made.

I’m the previous poster you are responding to. I don’t live in Loudoun County—I live in Arlington.

When did Arlington take away the ability to take accelerate algebra? My seventh grader is taking it now, which from everything I’ve seen is the earliest you could take it in any of the APS math pathways.

They didn’t take away the option, but they greatly (& quietly) increased the Math Inventory score needed in 6th grade (which was virtual & had asynchronous Mondays last year) to qualify for alegrara in 7th. At my kid’s APS middle school, there is no 7th grade alegra class this year. There are a few 7th graders taking algebra in an 8th grade class.

That's not because APS is eliminating Intensified Algebra for 7th grade, it's because there were not enough students at Gunston enrolled in the class to support a dedicated class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VMPI is disastrous for public schools. It’s a very good thing that he is getting rid of it.

To the pp that was lamenting about just buying in a good school district and now going to have to look at private. You should send him an email to thank him. He just saved your good public school.

Why - because blending algebra & geometry and adding data science was really that terrible?

No, because they wanted to put all kids in the same math class until 10th or 11th grade. I hate Youngkin and did not vote for him but I'm glad this is gone.

That idea that was loosely floated (not even on infographic) around a year ago was squashed several months ago. Stop spreading disinformation.

It was actually in the initial proposal as was equity as the #1 goal (not math education), then it was quickly walked back and equity was put further down the list of goals. They were waiting until after the election until releasing the final version. It truly was like a "you have to pass it to find out what's in it". Didn't vote for him, but know a lot of Asian people who did solely for this issue.

You have a problem with VDOE making sure that Virginia's math curriculum isn't leaving certain students behind or unprepared to hold a job?

Of course not. But let’s not leave them behind by devoting resources to help them catch up and be their very best, not by holding advanced kids back.

VMPI would not do that. This was clarified a long time ago, you just don't want to acknowledge it because it guts your best argument against VMPI.

+1

People still “concerned” about advanced math are either not paying attention or have ulterior motives.

Yes, my ulterior motive was making sure my son could get into Algebra early before that opportunity was taken away from him.

LCPS changes weren’t driven by VMPI. You’re blaming VDOE for a decision LCPS made.

I’m the previous poster you are responding to. I don’t live in Loudoun County—I live in Arlington.

When did Arlington take away the ability to take accelerate algebra? My seventh grader is taking it now, which from everything I’ve seen is the earliest you could take it in any of the APS math pathways.

They didn’t take away the option, but they greatly (& quietly) increased the Math Inventory score needed in 6th grade (which was virtual & had asynchronous Mondays last year) to qualify for alegrara in 7th. At my kid’s APS middle school, there is no 7th grade alegra class this year. There are a few 7th graders taking algebra in an 8th grade class.

That's not because APS is eliminating Intensified Algebra for 7th grade, it's because there were not enough students at Gunston enrolled in the class to support a dedicated class.

Yes, because APS made it much harder for kids to “qualify” by increasing the necessary scores after a year of admittedly teaching less in 6th grade. Even a year or two earlier, they had enough students for a dedicated 7th grade algebra class. That was the norm up until now.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VMPI is disastrous for public schools. It’s a very good thing that he is getting rid of it.

To the pp that was lamenting about just buying in a good school district and now going to have to look at private. You should send him an email to thank him. He just saved your good public school.

Why - because blending algebra & geometry and adding data science was really that terrible?

No, because they wanted to put all kids in the same math class until 10th or 11th grade. I hate Youngkin and did not vote for him but I'm glad this is gone.

That idea that was loosely floated (not even on infographic) around a year ago was squashed several months ago. Stop spreading disinformation.

It was actually in the initial proposal as was equity as the #1 goal (not math education), then it was quickly walked back and equity was put further down the list of goals. They were waiting until after the election until releasing the final version. It truly was like a "you have to pass it to find out what's in it". Didn't vote for him, but know a lot of Asian people who did solely for this issue.

You have a problem with VDOE making sure that Virginia's math curriculum isn't leaving certain students behind or unprepared to hold a job?

Of course not. But let’s not leave them behind by devoting resources to help them catch up and be their very best, not by holding advanced kids back.

VMPI would not do that. This was clarified a long time ago, you just don't want to acknowledge it because it guts your best argument against VMPI.

+1

People still “concerned” about advanced math are either not paying attention or have ulterior motives.

Yes, my ulterior motive was making sure my son could get into Algebra early before that opportunity was taken away from him.

LCPS changes weren’t driven by VMPI. You’re blaming VDOE for a decision LCPS made.

I’m the previous poster you are responding to. I don’t live in Loudoun County—I live in Arlington.

When did Arlington take away the ability to take accelerate algebra? My seventh grader is taking it now, which from everything I’ve seen is the earliest you could take it in any of the APS math pathways.

They didn’t take away the option, but they greatly (& quietly) increased the Math Inventory score needed in 6th grade (which was virtual & had asynchronous Mondays last year) to qualify for alegrara in 7th. At my kid’s APS middle school, there is no 7th grade alegra class this year. There are a few 7th graders taking algebra in an 8th grade class.

That's not because APS is eliminating Intensified Algebra for 7th grade, it's because there were not enough students at Gunston enrolled in the class to support a dedicated class.

Yes, because APS made it much harder for kids to “qualify” by increasing the necessary scores after a year of admittedly teaching less in 6th grade. Even a year or two earlier, they had enough students for a dedicated 7th grade algebra class. That was the norm up until now.

That is called raising the bar and making sure that kids aren't rushed through these foundational skills. It was an academic decision, not political.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VMPI is disastrous for public schools. It’s a very good thing that he is getting rid of it.

To the pp that was lamenting about just buying in a good school district and now going to have to look at private. You should send him an email to thank him. He just saved your good public school.

Why - because blending algebra & geometry and adding data science was really that terrible?

I know. People get them worked up over anything! They already carved out an exception for advanced math. We don't want governors pandering to loud minorities of parents by fiat, I want evidenced-based, expert judgment curriculum with opportunities for community review.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

Ok. But the Loudpun Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction wrote me an email (that I still have) saying that accelerated math in MS was not going to be affected by the new pathways. That was a bold faced lie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

Ok. But the Loudpun Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction wrote me an email (that I still have) saying that accelerated math in MS was not going to be affected by the new pathways. That was a bold faced lie.

What about it was a lie?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

Ok. But the Loudpun Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction wrote me an email (that I still have) saying that accelerated math in MS was not going to be affected by the new pathways. That was a bold faced lie.

What about it was a lie?

Algebra 1 in 6th grade is gone, no exceptions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

Ok. But the Loudpun Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction wrote me an email (that I still have) saying that accelerated math in MS was not going to be affected by the new pathways. That was a bold faced lie.

How was that a lie? What specifically did he/she wrote and when? Was he/she referring to VMPI or LCPS-specific pathways?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

Ok. But the Loudpun Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction wrote me an email (that I still have) saying that accelerated math in MS was not going to be affected by the new pathways. That was a bold faced lie.

What about it was a lie?

Algebra 1 in 6th grade is gone, no exceptions.

That was a LCPS decision, not VMPI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

Ok. But the Loudpun Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction wrote me an email (that I still have) saying that accelerated math in MS was not going to be affected by the new pathways. That was a bold faced lie.

What about it was a lie?

Algebra 1 in 6th grade is gone, no exceptions.

Why do you believe that had anything to do wi the VMPI when VMPI was still is the drafting stage and was not scheduled to start rolling out until 2023? It doesn’t seem likely that a school system would overhaul its course offerings based on a proposal that was far from being finalized and might look different in its final form.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

Ok. But the Loudpun Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction wrote me an email (that I still have) saying that accelerated math in MS was not going to be affected by the new pathways. That was a bold faced lie.

What about it was a lie?

Algebra 1 in 6th grade is gone, no exceptions.

That was a LCPS decision, not VMPI.

Ok. PP asked what about it was a lie. I answered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

Ok. But the Loudpun Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction wrote me an email (that I still have) saying that accelerated math in MS was not going to be affected by the new pathways. That was a bold faced lie.

What about it was a lie?

Algebra 1 in 6th grade is gone, no exceptions.

That was a LCPS decision, not VMPI.

Ok. PP asked what about it was a lie. I answered.

DP. But you never explained how it was a lie. The email said VMPI wouldn’t change the math options, not that LCPS would never change the options independent of VMPI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

Ok. But the Loudpun Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction wrote me an email (that I still have) saying that accelerated math in MS was not going to be affected by the new pathways. That was a bold faced lie.

What about it was a lie?

Algebra 1 in 6th grade is gone, no exceptions.

That was a LCPS decision, not VMPI.

Ok. PP asked what about it was a lie. I answered.

DP. But you never explained how it was a lie. The email said VMPI wouldn’t change the math options, not that LCPS would never change the options independent of VMPI

Yes, it seems like PP misinterpreted the email.