2.0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is public school, for approximately 70,000 elementary school students in the county. The math curriculum was not working for the district, and they had to comply with the new national core standards, so this is what they have come up with. It's hard not to hear all these complaints as sort of entitled.

In this school system, 62.8% of all students complete Algebra I by 8th grade. Here is the ethnic breakdown: 82% Asian students complete Algebra I by 8th grade, 79% white, 44% black, 43% Latino. When you complete Algebra I by 8th grade, you are able to get to Calculus by senior year. How is this a disaster?

What grade do all of these parents want their student to do Calculus in -- 10th? So that means they are taking, what, multivariable calculus in 11th, and then by senior year they all have to bus to College Park to take classes for math majors at U.Md.?

Thanks for bringing some sanity to the discussion!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't think anyone here is against acceleration just against acceleration fours own sake or when it's not truly needed. My argument is that there is nothing in 2.0 that says you cannot accelerate. If that's the case I'll turn coat but for now it's too early

Do you mean to say you are against access of advanced subject material for capable math students in Grade K, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5? The advanced subject material may be found in elementary schools, and is taught, but access for capable and willing students is prohibited if this is not provided in the current grade level work. And for many it doesn't exist in their current grade level.

No I'm not against access anything you've described

[Anonymous]

This is public school, for approximately 70,000 elementary school students in the county. The math curriculum was not working for the district, and they had to comply with the new national core standards, so this is what they have come up with. It's hard not to hear all these complaints as sort of entitled.

In this school system, 62.8% of all students complete Algebra I by 8th grade. Here is the ethnic breakdown: 82% Asian students complete Algebra I by 8th grade, 79% white, 44% black, 43% Latino. When you complete Algebra I by 8th grade, you are able to get to Calculus by senior year. How is this a disaster? What grade do all of these parents want their student to do Calculus in -- 10th? So that means they are taking, what, multivariable calculus in 11th, and then by senior year they all have to bus to College Park to take classes for math majors at U.Md.?

Again, your knowledge of mathematics is quite limited if you think the goal is to reach Calculus by senior year? There are many useful topics MCPS should develop for the the 21st century secondary school student including counting and probability, discret mathematics and number theory well before Calculus. Indeed, many students rushing into Calculus will have a tough time with these subjects. Where is this subject material in curriculum 2.0? What I have experienced with curriculum 2.0 ( 2 years now) is a huge disconnect from conception to actual delivery in my kid's classroom. The delivery leaves alot to be desired. And many kids stuck with poor teachers and math teaching do not have the life boat of simply placing out of this misery with an opportunity to show what they have mastered. The teachers fear assessing and evaluating the students (kick the problem down the road) for fear of the tsunami they may face.

After 2 years curriculum 2.0 has failed many of the current students...presently stuck in the academic and intellectual mud.

The goal is not to rush to Calculus as you seem to believe. This has never been the goal.

[Anonymous]

This is public school, for approximately 70,000 elementary school students in the county. The math curriculum was not working for the district, and they had to comply with the new national core standards, so this is what they have come up with. It's hard not to hear all these complaints as sort of entitled.

In this school system, 62.8% of all students complete Algebra I by 8th grade. Here is the ethnic breakdown: 82% Asian students complete Algebra I by 8th grade, 79% white, 44% black, 43% Latino. When you complete Algebra I by 8th grade, you are able to get to Calculus by senior year. How is this a disaster?

What grade do all of these parents want their student to do Calculus in -- 10th? So that means they are taking, what, multivariable calculus in 11th, and then by senior year they all have to bus to College Park to take classes for math majors at U.Md.?

Thanks for bringing some sanity to the discussion!


Yet, another sheep who believes the goal is to rush to Calculus.

Wrong, 21st century primary and secondary kids need discrete mathematics, number theory and counting and probability (all excellent preparation for the digital age, programming and computers).

It's not about rushing to Calculus. It's about providing a challenging mathematical education for our children. Many of our children are currently NOT challenged in their current math classes based on this super duper deep curriculum 2.0. If these kids are not challenged what are their options? How many years should they wait for th challenge to miraculously emerge?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Not quite, they have to be EVALUATED not tested. I don't believe a test exists out there to determine conceptual ability for younger children only ability to generated the correct result.

Why does it take MCPS 2 years (... and counting) to evaluate some children in curriculum 2.0 math?
There are some kids in K and 1 (already mastered addition, subtraction, multiplication, division and place value) now in grade 2 and 3 (and still working on grade level with place value)?

When will the evaluation begin and end?

There are children in MCPS at this level and not far behind condemned to help MCPS artificially reduce the achievement gap!

PP, I'm not sure what kindof grades your DC has been receiving but if you are getting ES once this new report card comes out I would kick into action. If you are not figure out why since your child has been accelerated in the past figure out what under the new curriculum is not being mastered. For now, I think all you can do is wait to see the curriculum and its grading system together and respond accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Place value is work to the left and to the right of the decimal point. Some kids learn this in Grade 1 some in Grade 4. And early mastery helps develop early number sense (no calculators!). All depends on the quality of the child's instruction (at school and/or at home).

Ask your friendly MCPS representative how curriculum 2.0 handles this (if your Math teacher doesn't know or is evasive). I have no clue. I have never seen any details of the curriculum 2.0 math agenda from K through 5. I only see occasional worksheets my children bring home covering areas they have already mastered years ago.

[Anonymous]

PP, I'm not sure what kindof grades your DC has been receiving but if you are getting ES once this new report card comes out I would kick into action. If you are not figure out why since your child has been accelerated in the past figure out what under the new curriculum is not being mastered. For now, I think all you can do is wait to see the curriculum and its grading system together and respond accordingly.

What are you talking about? Do you have any children? One of my children was in it last year (for a whole year) and we are still waiting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is public school, for approximately 70,000 elementary school students in the county. The math curriculum was not working for the district, and they had to comply with the new national core standards, so this is what they have come up with. It's hard not to hear all these complaints as sort of entitled.

In this school system, 62.8% of all students complete Algebra I by 8th grade. Here is the ethnic breakdown: 82% Asian students complete Algebra I by 8th grade, 79% white, 44% black, 43% Latino. When you complete Algebra I by 8th grade, you are able to get to Calculus by senior year. How is this a disaster?

What grade do all of these parents want their student to do Calculus in -- 10th? So that means they are taking, what, multivariable calculus in 11th, and then by senior year they all have to bus to College Park to take classes for math majors at U.Md.?

Thanks for bringing some sanity to the discussion!

Are you two kidding? How is it "entitlement" for parents to complain about something that isn't working for their kids. Do you also think it is entitlement for a SN kid's parents to expect an appropriate education for him? This isn't about racing to calculus -- it is about making sure that kids who enjoy math and are good at it have the opportunity to be challenged and to learn at their pace. Frankly, it seems entitled on your part(s) to think that these smart kids should sit down and shut up so that, what, your kid doesn't "feel bad" about being slower in math?

[Anonymous]

Part of the acceleration push was the fact they it was felt in order to have kids ready for college they had to be at a certain all along the chain so they were pushed grades ahead in math so they could reach geometry by 10th, etc. What was discovered is that while the kids were doing geometry they did not have a strong understanding of the math concepts - yes I'm sure the really gifted children did but the majority of students that were accelerated didn't. Once they reached college they were NOT, in fact, better prepared for college level math. SO now they are trying a new approach to give kids number sense. Personally I'm sure there is a happy middle ground for everyone.- acceleration for kids that have show they can handle it and more depth for everyone. I'm waiting and seeing I think there will be many modificiations as we go to meet the needs of the students. Is this the right answer to teaching? Who knows. But the other way was not working for the vast majority of students so that wasn't really working either. Teacher preparation is also very important. You see it in science being taught, math etc. The teacher's are generalists amd they may be very good at writing and reading and not so strong in math and science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

PP, I'm not sure what kindof grades your DC has been receiving but if you are getting ES once this new report card comes out I would kick into action. If you are not figure out why since your child has been accelerated in the past figure out what under the new curriculum is not being mastered. For now, I think all you can do is wait to see the curriculum and its grading system together and respond accordingly.

What are you talking about? Do you have any children? One of my children was in it last year (for a whole year) and we are still waiting?

Impossible this is the first year the new report cards will be come out.

[Anonymous]

Part of the acceleration push was the fact they it was felt in order to have kids ready for college they had to be at a certain all along the chain so they were pushed grades ahead in math so they could reach geometry by 10th, etc. What was discovered is that while the kids were doing geometry they did not have a strong understanding of the math concepts - yes I'm sure the really gifted children did but the majority of students that were accelerated didn't. Once they reached college they were NOT, in fact, better prepared for college level math. SO now they are trying a new approach to give kids number sense. Personally I'm sure there is a happy middle ground for everyone.- acceleration for kids that have show they can handle it and more depth for everyone. I'm waiting and seeing I think there will be many modificiations as we go to meet the needs of the students. Is this the right answer to teaching? Who knows. But the other way was not working for the vast majority of students so that wasn't really working either. Teacher preparation is also very important. You see it in science being taught, math etc. The teacher's are generalists amd they may be very good at writing and reading and not so strong in math and science.

You miss the point. No one is advocating an acceleration push so spare us a discussion about all the things that may go wrong when students are inappropriately pushed or accelerated or placed in the wrong classroom. We get this. No one is advocating acceleration push of MCPS children.

MCPS should not stand in the way of kids ready to accelerate and move on if they are capable and willing...and demonstrate so. This option should never be taken off the education table...even if MCPS and their teachers screwed up in the past because they could not evaluate kids in math and accelerated 40% of kids nevertheless to meet some unsubstantiated quota. That's the fundamental problem...a senseless solution. So now with subject acceleration and advancement off the table, MCPS has boxed itself into another senseless position of having their inadequate math teachers provide the math enrichment and acceleration to capable students within the same classroom. But, I gather since the teachers cannot evaluate the curriculum 2.0--they do not have the tools-- they cannot therefore provide the differentiated instruction!

At some schools, are quickly finding out the curriculum 2.0 they bought is short changing many students because either the system and/or teachers can't implement it or it is not what it is cracked up to be after 2 years.

[Anonymous]

Impossible this is the first year the new report cards will be come out.

My fault. Last year they must have used the old report card and evaluation method for the new curriculum 2.0. I'll wait for the flip side this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you claiming problem solving and critical thinking is somehow new in this decade? Nonsense, math is about problem solving and criticial thinking. As this applies to elementary school math there have been no changes or new paradigms for 101 years. What has changed (and for the worse) is the competence of elementary school math teachers and the increasing aversion and phobia our students have for the subject. And administrators and educators that limit access of students to math concepts based solely on an arbitrary grade level or age are incompetent. They should not be teaching children (with limitless academic potential) rather geriatric subjects with dwindling and extinguishing fire.

Actually, what is changing is that 2.0 is making sure Snowflake is actually engaging in critical thinking rather than spitting out an answer because she knows how to compute according to an algorithm. The problem with the old standards is that the system only cared that Snowflake could get to an answer, but not understand the "why" of how that answer is the right answer. In higher math at the real college level that underlies engineering and science, the student is served much better if she understands "why" numbers work the way they do, rather than just acting like a human calculator. The problem is that Snowflake's older brother hit differential equations in college and couldn't do it because he could only spit out answers via an algorithm he memorized. There's been at least a decade and a half at the current curriculum that has demonstrated this. (see earlier post by spouse of university professor).

BTW, I am the parent of the average second grader that posted above about Common Core.

FYI, there is not a replacement for the MSA yet, but there are formative assessments for the end of each unit that has been rolled out in 2.0. Snowflake has the opportunity to show how much she has mastered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you claiming problem solving and critical thinking is somehow new in this decade? Nonsense, math is about problem solving and criticial thinking. As this applies to elementary school math there have been no changes or new paradigms for 101 years. What has changed (and for the worse) is the competence of elementary school math teachers and the increasing aversion and phobia our students have for the subject. And administrators and educators that limit access of students to math concepts based solely on an arbitrary grade level or age are incompetent. They should not be teaching children (with limitless academic potential) rather geriatric subjects with dwindling and extinguishing fire.

Actually, what is changing is that 2.0 is making sure Snowflake is actually engaging in critical thinking rather than spitting out an answer because she knows how to compute according to an algorithm. The problem with the old standards is that the system only cared that Snowflake could get to an answer, but not understand the "why" of how that answer is the right answer. In higher math at the real college level that underlies engineering and science, the student is served much better if she understands "why" numbers work the way they do, rather than just acting like a human calculator. The problem is that Snowflake's older brother hit differential equations in college and couldn't do it because he could only spit out answers via an algorithm he memorized. There's been at least a decade and a half at the current curriculum that has demonstrated this. (see earlier post by spouse of university professor).

BTW, I am the parent of the average second grader that posted above about Common Core.

FYI, there is not a replacement for the MSA yet, but there are formative assessments for the end of each unit that has been rolled out in 2.0. Snowflake has the opportunity to show how much she has mastered.

Why is is so hard for you to acknowledge that there are kids in MCPS who have mastered the work (both the how and the why)? Is your position that we simply not care about these kids? Rather, we should just put them in a room with kids that struggle in math, have them be bored by repeating simple concepts and, potentially lose interest in math. Is this the way a sensible educational organization treats its excellent students?

So I ask you: what do you do with the kids who really "get" the material? If you choose to answer, please do not focus your response on the red herring of what happens to the "snowflakes" (as you call them) who really haven't mastered the work. Please focus on the ones who have done so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you claiming problem solving and critical thinking is somehow new in this decade? Nonsense, math is about problem solving and criticial thinking. As this applies to elementary school math there have been no changes or new paradigms for 101 years. What has changed (and for the worse) is the competence of elementary school math teachers and the increasing aversion and phobia our students have for the subject. And administrators and educators that limit access of students to math concepts based solely on an arbitrary grade level or age are incompetent. They should not be teaching children (with limitless academic potential) rather geriatric subjects with dwindling and extinguishing fire.

Actually, what is changing is that 2.0 is making sure Snowflake is actually engaging in critical thinking rather than spitting out an answer because she knows how to compute according to an algorithm. The problem with the old standards is that the system only cared that Snowflake could get to an answer, but not understand the "why" of how that answer is the right answer. In higher math at the real college level that underlies engineering and science, the student is served much better if she understands "why" numbers work the way they do, rather than just acting like a human calculator. The problem is that Snowflake's older brother hit differential equations in college and couldn't do it because he could only spit out answers via an algorithm he memorized. There's been at least a decade and a half at the current curriculum that has demonstrated this. (see earlier post by spouse of university professor).

BTW, I am the parent of the average second grader that posted above about Common Core.

FYI, there is not a replacement for the MSA yet, but there are formative assessments for the end of each unit that has been rolled out in 2.0. Snowflake has the opportunity to show how much she has mastered.

I love you!