Why is the math so terrible? Can parents do anything?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You can claim the track is "projected" on average to be ahead by one year but it still does not benefit the smart kids. You are no longer allowed to take Algebra I in 6th grade. They dumb down the curriculum in elementary school so you can not make that pathway.

If you're saying that the entire math curriculum has been "dumbed down" because a very small number of students who previously would have taken Algebra I in 6th grade and calculus in 10th grade now must take Algebra I in 7th grade and calculus in 11th grade -- well, ok. But I disagree with you.

It is dumbed down for the smarter kids, yes. And at my daughter's ES school there were over 20 of 97 kids that went on to Algebra 1 years ago. It wasn't that small of a number. There are just many more uneducated children coming into the MCPS system these days and shrinking the percentage of these kids. Not the actual number but percentage. But that is not those kid's fault but yet they have to pay that price.

That's rare.

When my son was at Westland, I was in the office one day and happened to see the clipboard of kids who rode the bus to BCC in Algebra 2 (the kids who would have taken Algebra 1 in 6th). The list was maybe 12 kids, or about 1% of the student body. Now, there might have been more kids who took Algebra 1 in sixth and repeated a class along the way somewhere, but of kids who started on that track, and stayed on that track, there were 12 kids.

What's your point? That those 12 kids don't count? Seems to me that if they're ready and willing, we should teach them. And if it's just 12 kids, it doesn't seem that logistically hard to continue to provide that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I guess I don't really understand what kind of explanation would be appropriate for the 1/4 vs 1/3 question. I mean, I could draw a picture that would show it. Or if I had to do it verbally, I'd say "because if you cut something into 4 equal pieces those pieces will be smaller than if you cut it into 3 pieces". Is that a sufficient answer?
I am a parent, and I was definitely a "math" kid. I'm also very verbal, so that part doesn't scare me. But it does seem like they've injected a lot of "edu-speak" into the "new math" that makes it unnecessarily inaccessible to parents (and it looks like some teachers as well).

Yes, either one would answer the question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You can claim the track is "projected" on average to be ahead by one year but it still does not benefit the smart kids. You are no longer allowed to take Algebra I in 6th grade. They dumb down the curriculum in elementary school so you can not make that pathway.

If you're saying that the entire math curriculum has been "dumbed down" because a very small number of students who previously would have taken Algebra I in 6th grade and calculus in 10th grade now must take Algebra I in 7th grade and calculus in 11th grade -- well, ok. But I disagree with you.

It is dumbed down for the smarter kids, yes. And at my daughter's ES school there were over 20 of 97 kids that went on to Algebra 1 years ago. It wasn't that small of a number. There are just many more uneducated children coming into the MCPS system these days and shrinking the percentage of these kids. Not the actual number but percentage. But that is not those kid's fault but yet they have to pay that price.

That's rare.

When my son was at Westland, I was in the office one day and happened to see the clipboard of kids who rode the bus to BCC in Algebra 2 (the kids who would have taken Algebra 1 in 6th). The list was maybe 12 kids, or about 1% of the student body. Now, there might have been more kids who took Algebra 1 in sixth and repeated a class along the way somewhere, but of kids who started on that track, and stayed on that track, there were 12 kids.

What's your point? That those 12 kids don't count? Seems to me that if they're ready and willing, we should teach them. And if it's just 12 kids, it doesn't seem that logistically hard to continue to provide that.

My point is that if a middle school, one with a reputation for advanced kids, usually has about 1% of their kids on that track, it would be rare for an elementary school to have more than 20% of their kids on that track, as reported by the PP. Do you disagree?

It's important to note that under the old system, in order to make it to Algebra 1 in sixth you needed to take the highest level of math offered to elementary schoolers (2 years ahead) and then skip the year between 5th (when they'd take math 7) and sixth (which would otherwise be IM). Under the new system, a kid who takes the highest level of math in 5th (compacted 5/6 math) would need to skip a year (math 7 which is now preAlgebra) to get to Algebra. I don't know if they allow this or not. The old pathway (skipping IM) wasn't listed as an option in many places, but it definitely happened. Since I don't have a middle schooler anymore, I don't know if the skip is still allowed.

[Anonymous]

DS in compacted Math. In 4th grade Principal told me under the old curriculum she would have sent him to IM in 4th and Algebra in 5. But now Compacted is her only option. Why? It is fine for my kid for a variety of reasons BUT for the kids that it doesn't work for why in the world would you tie a Principals hand and not allow her to put a kid in the class she thought was the most appropriate. So it just does not make sense. Why, why, why would you limit opportunity for kids. I get that some kids were accelerated when they should not have been. But fix that problem without causing another which is detrimental to our brightest kids.

[Anonymous]

Never heard anyone on this board (no less real life) mention algebra in 5th grade.. Not doubting the kids ability but that was not a typical path. Exceptions are still made and if that kid is truly on that high a level, parents should be contacting people outside of the school for guidance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Never heard anyone on this board (no less real life) mention algebra in 5th grade.. Not doubting the kids ability but that was not a typical path. Exceptions are still made and if that kid is truly on that high a level, parents should be contacting people outside of the school for guidance.

Who cares about actual classes, the point is still the terrible decisions made with the implementation of 2.0 Math for Elementary school kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never heard anyone on this board (no less real life) mention algebra in 5th grade.. Not doubting the kids ability but that was not a typical path. Exceptions are still made and if that kid is truly on that high a level, parents should be contacting people outside of the school for guidance.

Who cares about actual classes, the point is still the terrible decisions made with the implementation of 2.0 Math for Elementary school kids.

Who cares about actual classes is basically the same as saying who cares about the facts.

Evidently, very very rarely, there is a child who may be ready for algebra (formerly a ninth-grade class, now an eighth-grade class) in fifth grade. This child may now not be allowed to take algebra in fifth grade. I don't think that's grounds for condemning the entire elementary school curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You can claim the track is "projected" on average to be ahead by one year but it still does not benefit the smart kids. You are no longer allowed to take Algebra I in 6th grade. They dumb down the curriculum in elementary school so you can not make that pathway.

If you're saying that the entire math curriculum has been "dumbed down" because a very small number of students who previously would have taken Algebra I in 6th grade and calculus in 10th grade now must take Algebra I in 7th grade and calculus in 11th grade -- well, ok. But I disagree with you.

It is dumbed down for the smarter kids, yes. And at my daughter's ES school there were over 20 of 97 kids that went on to Algebra 1 years ago. It wasn't that small of a number. There are just many more uneducated children coming into the MCPS system these days and shrinking the percentage of these kids. Not the actual number but percentage. But that is not those kid's fault but yet they have to pay that price.

That's rare.

When my son was at Westland, I was in the office one day and happened to see the clipboard of kids who rode the bus to BCC in Algebra 2 (the kids who would have taken Algebra 1 in 6th). The list was maybe 12 kids, or about 1% of the student body. Now, there might have been more kids who took Algebra 1 in sixth and repeated a class along the way somewhere, but of kids who started on that track, and stayed on that track, there were 12 kids.

What's your point? That those 12 kids don't count? Seems to me that if they're ready and willing, we should teach them. And if it's just 12 kids, it doesn't seem that logistically hard to continue to provide that.

My point is that if a middle school, one with a reputation for advanced kids, usually has about 1% of their kids on that track, it would be rare for an elementary school to have more than 20% of their kids on that track, as reported by the PP. Do you disagree?

It's important to note that under the old system, in order to make it to Algebra 1 in sixth you needed to take the highest level of math offered to elementary schoolers (2 years ahead) and then skip the year between 5th (when they'd take math 7) and sixth (which would otherwise be IM). Under the new system, a kid who takes the highest level of math in 5th (compacted 5/6 math) would need to skip a year (math 7 which is now preAlgebra) to get to Algebra. I don't know if they allow this or not. The old pathway (skipping IM) wasn't listed as an option in many places, but it definitely happened. Since I don't have a middle schooler anymore, I don't know if the skip is still allowed.

I think you're confused. Her number was 20 out of 97, so that wAs 20 percent of the grade. You're talking about a population of 1200, so I think you're talking about the entire school. No wonder you don't mind the mcps math!

[Anonymous]

What school was in that 20% took algebra in 6th grade? At my ES it was 1 or 2 kids a year. There are still 5th graders coming up for IM at the MS so I assume that there still are a few 6th grade exceptions to the rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What school was in that 20% took algebra in 6th grade? At my ES it was 1 or 2 kids a year. There are still 5th graders coming up for IM at the MS so I assume that there still are a few 6th grade exceptions to the rule.

I call BS on anyone who says 20% of any non-magnet public school would take algebra in 6th. Back in the day I was one of the most accelerated math students in my entire school district, and I didn't take algebra until 8th grade (and then I took it at an accelerated pace, doubling up with geometry...the following year I doubled up trig and math analysis, and then calc in 10th). Why are we condemning the entire county system (and a national standard that is being followed in a majority of states) because kids might not complete calculus before 11th grade? FWIW, I wasn't offered my accelerated math track in my school -- I went to the local university. So that is always an option if you have a super-advanced kid on your hands. And anyway, there are still kids taking algebra in 6th grade, so what more do people want?

[Anonymous]

My son took Algebra last year in 6th grade. The school system accelerated him in Elementary School when it was favored and they saw he could do higher level work. Then when MCPS changed courses and did not want kids to be accelerated to that degree, he had teachers not recommending him for the next level class despite his earning A's. Seriously, what makes them think repeating a class you earned an A be an appropriate education. Anyhow, I filed appeals till he got into the classes he had the right to take. He is still an A student taking Geometry in 7th grade. It's rare and it takes some tenacity, but it can still happen. It is just not encouraged by MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Can I just say "decomposing"? 3rd grade math--insane! Am considering private school to get away from this madness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can I just say "decomposing"? 3rd grade math--insane! Am considering private school to get away from this madness.

It's ok, PP. If you don't like the word "decomposing", you can say "borrowing". The Common Core Math Police won't come to get you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can I just say "decomposing"? 3rd grade math--insane! Am considering private school to get away from this madness.

It's ok, PP. If you don't like the word "decomposing", you can say "borrowing". The Common Core Math Police won't come to get you.

Actually, decomposing and borrowing are different.

[Anonymous]

I think decomposing was always part of the curriculum Who never had to break numbers down?? I did. My pre 2.0 kids did.