VMPI-ways to speak out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complaining here does nothing. I called my Delegate's office and the staffer clearly new nothing about the plan and just repeated two bullets of information. I said -- the plan seems to eliminate all tracking and honors courses. If you understand differently, please let me know. And if that is the case, please ask the Delegate (also the Speaker) if she supports the elimination of honors classes across the state. Waiting to hear back.

My State Senator asked me to tell him more about the proposal.

I asked our principal how it would effect AAP and she didn't even understand the question. It seemed like she was either out of the loop or ducking.

You need to call your reps. The VA DOE is moving this without explaining the implications to elected officials.

https://whosmy.virginiageneralassembly.gov/

The VA DOE is doing this because they are following the priorities of the blue administration.

Math Pathways Initiatives are happening all across the US, including in red states like Indiana, Utah, Tennessee, etc.

More pathways does not mean removing tracking. It does not mean removing acceleration in math.
The standards being implemented reduce the pathways thru 10th grade to 1 down from more than a dozen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I'm one of the people referenced in the first page of posts who thought it sounded so crazy I didn't believe it. I appreciate all the links and info which I'm checking out now.

My 5th grader just moved into advanced math this year (doing the 6th grade curriculum and essentially skipping 5th grade math) and I've never seen him as engaged or excited about math. It is the first thing he tells me about each day. It would be a shame if this isn't an option any more for kids who are ready for it.

I don't see why everyone has to be in one class for the kids who are less quick with math skills to be challenged. It sounds like they want to push the lower end harder than they need to be pushed and hold back the kids who are quicker with it. Are they doing this for reading skills as well?

Please share this proposed change with anyone who will listen, particularly neighbors and families who are empty nesters or seniors.

Share with anyone who votes in Virginia.

This destruction of education standards cannot continue.

Imagine what education in Virginia will look like with 2 more years of this type of nonsense.

Yes, god forbid if more kids are doing well and not just the privileged UMC kids.

Lowering standards by significant amounts because the VA department of education does not believe in the promise or capabilites of minority children does nothing to help any child to reach their potential and is the opposite of the equity they claim to believe in.

Remember the fence drawing?

Equity means giving those kids the tools and resources to see over the fence.

It does not mean making making everyone lay on the ground then sawing down the fence so everyone reaches the same low standards.

If the VA department of education and the politicians who appointed them and set their goals do not believe in the potential of all of our students, including minority students, to rise to their full potential, and don't support giving all students in Virginia a world class education, including poor and minority children, then they do not deserve to serve another minute in office.

There is nothing more racist than assuming that because of their skin tone, children are not capable of performing at their full potential unless you lower standards for everyone else.

It's not LOWERING the standards - it's helping more kids reach the standards. Your UMC kids will still fully meet the standards.

You don't have kids or work in education in Virginia, do you?

It is most certainly lowering the standards.

Algebra 2 does not happen until 11th grade. They will not have completed or learned the lowest skill set on the SATs until after they take the SATs.

In fcps, Algebra 1 is taken in 6th-7th for the advanced kids, with geometry in 7th or 8th, and Algebra 2 in 8th or 9th. These kids are in calculis their sophomore or junior year, multivariable calculus in 11th or 12th. The new LOWERED standards eliminate the advanced math track entirely. China must be laughing with glee of the dems plan to destroy what is left of our math curriculum.


Middle of the road kids take Algebra 1 in 8th grade, geometry in 9th and Algebra 2 in 10th. The new LOWERED math standards eliminates the middle track and puts everyone on the exact same remedial track.

At our fcps high school, these new LOWERED standards negatively impact most of the students, including a lot of minority students, because the VA department of education does not believe in the capablitites of kids who have darker skin or speak with an accent. The lower standards negatively imlacts all of the students, including the students they claim to be creating the lower standards for. It is disgusting to dismantle and lower the state math curriculum under the mantle of helping minority kids, because the VA department of education does not believe in their potential to achieve greatness in academics.

That is not LOWERING the standards. That is slowing down the acceleration BEYOND the standards.

Your kid will be fine taking AP Calculus their senior year.

You don't have kids, obviously.

I have two, both gifted. One exceptionally in math. And personally I have two STEM degrees and work in STEM.

My kids will be fine to have a slightly slower rat race. AP Calc in senior year is reasonable.

AP Calc in senior year would not be reasonable under the lowered standards. They have it as an option, but kids would likely need extra classes outside school to be able to take it, or calculus itself would be a watered down class in Virginia, with the teacher having to do lots of remedial work(presumably the weaker kids would not be in here).
So the class would only be for those who absolutely want to take calculus, and their parents would arrange for them to get prep work done over the summer.
Integrated Math 10, followed by two semesters of , or perhaps more classes, selected from applications of advanced algebra, applications of trigonometry, and precalculus with a focus on functions, would not do as well as algebra 2 or algebra 2/trigonometry in 10th and precalc in 11th.
Typical students who would previously have taken calculus in 12th grade will no longer be able to do so under these revised lower standards.
The people making the standards are OK with this, as in their video they explain how calculus really isn't necessary in high school.

How does that affect college readiness? I get that it calc isn’t offered at your HS it isn’t offered and (hopefully) won’t be held against the student in college admissions, but what about overall readiness? HS instruction is FAR better than college instruction at the Calc 1 level - in HS you’ll have a teacher who knows how to, well, teach; in college you’ll have a TA writing equations on a white board for an hour. I don’t see how kids who are planning to major in a STEM field where Calc+ is required will be properly prepared for college if they can’t take a HS Calc class. Makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complaining here does nothing. I called my Delegate's office and the staffer clearly new nothing about the plan and just repeated two bullets of information. I said -- the plan seems to eliminate all tracking and honors courses. If you understand differently, please let me know. And if that is the case, please ask the Delegate (also the Speaker) if she supports the elimination of honors classes across the state. Waiting to hear back.

My State Senator asked me to tell him more about the proposal.

I asked our principal how it would effect AAP and she didn't even understand the question. It seemed like she was either out of the loop or ducking.

You need to call your reps. The VA DOE is moving this without explaining the implications to elected officials.

https://whosmy.virginiageneralassembly.gov/

The VA DOE is doing this because they are following the priorities of the blue administration.

Math Pathways Initiatives are happening all across the US, including in red states like Indiana, Utah, Tennessee, etc.

More pathways does not mean removing tracking. It does not mean removing acceleration in math.
The standards being implemented reduce the pathways thru 10th grade to 1 down from more than a dozen.

There are a few common themes across the math reform initiatives. That is certainly one of them.

See #2.
https://www.utdanacenter.org/our-work/higher-education/dana-center-mathematics-pathways

Detracting
https://justequations.org/wp-content/uploads/Just-Equations-2019-Report-Branching-Out-Exec-Summ-Digital.pdf

Etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I'm one of the people referenced in the first page of posts who thought it sounded so crazy I didn't believe it. I appreciate all the links and info which I'm checking out now.

My 5th grader just moved into advanced math this year (doing the 6th grade curriculum and essentially skipping 5th grade math) and I've never seen him as engaged or excited about math. It is the first thing he tells me about each day. It would be a shame if this isn't an option any more for kids who are ready for it.

I don't see why everyone has to be in one class for the kids who are less quick with math skills to be challenged. It sounds like they want to push the lower end harder than they need to be pushed and hold back the kids who are quicker with it. Are they doing this for reading skills as well?

Please share this proposed change with anyone who will listen, particularly neighbors and families who are empty nesters or seniors.

Share with anyone who votes in Virginia.

This destruction of education standards cannot continue.

Imagine what education in Virginia will look like with 2 more years of this type of nonsense.

Yes, god forbid if more kids are doing well and not just the privileged UMC kids.

Lowering standards by significant amounts because the VA department of education does not believe in the promise or capabilites of minority children does nothing to help any child to reach their potential and is the opposite of the equity they claim to believe in.

Remember the fence drawing?

Equity means giving those kids the tools and resources to see over the fence.

It does not mean making making everyone lay on the ground then sawing down the fence so everyone reaches the same low standards.

If the VA department of education and the politicians who appointed them and set their goals do not believe in the potential of all of our students, including minority students, to rise to their full potential, and don't support giving all students in Virginia a world class education, including poor and minority children, then they do not deserve to serve another minute in office.

There is nothing more racist than assuming that because of their skin tone, children are not capable of performing at their full potential unless you lower standards for everyone else.

It's not LOWERING the standards - it's helping more kids reach the standards. Your UMC kids will still fully meet the standards.

You don't have kids or work in education in Virginia, do you?

It is most certainly lowering the standards.

Algebra 2 does not happen until 11th grade. They will not have completed or learned the lowest skill set on the SATs until after they take the SATs.

In fcps, Algebra 1 is taken in 6th-7th for the advanced kids, with geometry in 7th or 8th, and Algebra 2 in 8th or 9th. These kids are in calculis their sophomore or junior year, multivariable calculus in 11th or 12th. The new LOWERED standards eliminate the advanced math track entirely. China must be laughing with glee of the dems plan to destroy what is left of our math curriculum.


Middle of the road kids take Algebra 1 in 8th grade, geometry in 9th and Algebra 2 in 10th. The new LOWERED math standards eliminates the middle track and puts everyone on the exact same remedial track.

At our fcps high school, these new LOWERED standards negatively impact most of the students, including a lot of minority students, because the VA department of education does not believe in the capablitites of kids who have darker skin or speak with an accent. The lower standards negatively imlacts all of the students, including the students they claim to be creating the lower standards for. It is disgusting to dismantle and lower the state math curriculum under the mantle of helping minority kids, because the VA department of education does not believe in their potential to achieve greatness in academics.

That is not LOWERING the standards. That is slowing down the acceleration BEYOND the standards.

Your kid will be fine taking AP Calculus their senior year.

You don't have kids, obviously.

I have two, both gifted. One exceptionally in math. And personally I have two STEM degrees and work in STEM.

My kids will be fine to have a slightly slower rat race. AP Calc in senior year is reasonable.

AP Calc in senior year would not be reasonable under the lowered standards. They have it as an option, but kids would likely need extra classes outside school to be able to take it, or calculus itself would be a watered down class in Virginia, with the teacher having to do lots of remedial work(presumably the weaker kids would not be in here).
So the class would only be for those who absolutely want to take calculus, and their parents would arrange for them to get prep work done over the summer.
Integrated Math 10, followed by two semesters of , or perhaps more classes, selected from applications of advanced algebra, applications of trigonometry, and precalculus with a focus on functions, would not do as well as algebra 2 or algebra 2/trigonometry in 10th and precalc in 11th.
Typical students who would previously have taken calculus in 12th grade will no longer be able to do so under these revised lower standards.
The people making the standards are OK with this, as in their video they explain how calculus really isn't necessary in high school.

You are speculating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: kids would likely need extra classes outside school to be able to take it, or calculus itself would be a watered down class in Virginia, with the teacher having to do lots of remedial work(presumably the weaker kids would not be in here).
...

You are speculating.

Sure, it's educated speculation based on what VDOE has told us thus far (and what they are/aren't directly answering in terms of questions). Consider:
They have told us 'students will still be able to take calculus'; but they have not explained in detail what classes students take when in order to make that happen.

They have told us that they're eliminating all acceleration. Right now: non accelerated students take Algebra 1 in 9th, Geometry in 10th, Algebra 2 in 11th, and Precalc/something else/nothing in 12th. There is no calculus for these students *unless they take classes outside of school to catch up.*

Understanding that they're planning to rework Algebra 1, geometry, and algebra 2 content into a different sequence: Either this is still going to take roughly 3 years of time to get through the content, OR they're going to drop some topics from the curriculum. They have not revealed what the specific mapping of content is from the old courses to the new, but they have also never stated that they're dropping content. Assuming it's going to take 3 years of time to get through all this course material still, that leaves kids who want calc in 12th having to take precalc with trig (right now a 1 year course) when? This is why we're speculating they're going to have to take it over the summer to be prepared.

The other option we can see is that some content will be dropped from (we're guessing) Algebra 2 and precalc/trig, and they plan to somehow combine those two (currently full year) courses into one year total so that students can still take calc in 12th. We think it's dumb to try and compress large amounts of the high school curriculum when VDOE is insisting that our kids need to all sit through years of repetition in elementary instead of going to algebra when they're ready.

If you can logically see a 'path' to calc that doesn't involve summer school or compressing the HS curriculum in what VMPI has presented thus far, then by all means, tell us what we're missing here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont understand something ....if you know Democrats are going to lower standards continuously why do you keep voting them into office Virginia???? Creating "equity" is code for lowering standards. This is a fact not an opinion.

But it's not with the new diploma proposal. Instead they are eliminating the weak standard diploma that let schools off the hook for not expecting students (particularly Black, Hispanic, and Special Ed) to take all core subjects for all four years. Certainly it will be a challenge to get some to pass all the classes they need but it will show up in graduation rates if they fail.

They are eliminating the advanced diploma, which has more core class requirements and 3 years of a foreign language.

They are NOT bringing up the standard diploma to require all students to take the foreign language.

One one thing the dem VA dept of education did very recently, in the past 2 years, is to require all higg school students to take sequential electives.

They must take a beginner class, then level 2.

So if a kid is qualified for advanced orchestra as a freshman, they must take the lower level for one year before they can do the level they are qualified to do, in order to fulfill the state requirement of sequential electives.

The same goes in reverse. If you have a kid who just loves choir, but sings like a toad, they can no linger just enjoy singing by taking beginning chorus. It won't fulfill their sequential electives graduation requirements. They cannot just stay in the beginning choir for 4 years doing something they love. Either the teacher has to promote them to something they are unqualified for, or they need to find another elective they might not find as enriching, so they can check off the sequential elective box.

Or

If you have a high school kid with a variety of interests who is exploring where their strengths lie, they can no longer explore a variety of electives.

For example, I was a dabbler in high school. I took a different kind of elective every year and had an enriching experience exploring different things. I did theater, drawing, pottery, typing, choir (same beginning level both years) sewing and some business class. I dabbled and was a better student for having the opportunity to explore different things.

The sequential elective requirement decreed by this VA department of education has eliminated one of the most beneficial and enriching parts of the high school experience.

The VA department of education in recent years has been run by a bunch of anti education idiots.

I'm pretty sure that sequential elective requirement has been around for awhile. Like, over a decade (unless they eliminated/reinstated it and I missed that.) Yeah, the downside is less dabbling. And that's unfortunate, although to be fair, I'd say a bigger problem is that some of us had no opportunity to do electives outside of the arts, and if that wasn't your thing, well... tough. (I think my HS had one math elective but probably 7 different bands, 5 choruses, and 3 orchestras, and tons of other fine arts.)

It's correct that the proposal we've seen thus far of the consolidated diploma wouldn't require the language classes like the advanced diploma does, but it does require 4 years of all core classes (which the standard diploma doesn't require currently.) Importantly, the language classes would still be *available* to all students who want to do it (unlike the VMPI proposal, which would eliminate some of the math classes our kids need.)

[Anonymous]

I've only seen local coverage of the VMPI (Prince William and Fauquier counties). Fox news too lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It's not LOWERING the standards - it's helping more kids reach the standards. Your UMC kids will still fully meet the standards.

How is this helping more kids meet the standards who didn't before? It's putting them in classes with all the more advanced kids and assuming that having the smarter kids in there will somehow inspire them to do better. (or, assuming that they'll just do group work and therefore the advanced kids will be doing the work for the struggling kids. Which will help them 'meet standards' on paper, but not always in reality.)

From what I've been able to tell, this proposal takes what is currently the 'gen ed' curriculum, makes that the curriculum for everyone. It doesn't raise expectations for anyone (and for many lowers them) and doesn't provide any additional resources (extra instruction time, extra teachers, or curriculum support) to help the struggling kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That is not LOWERING the standards. That is slowing down the acceleration BEYOND the standards.

Your kid will be fine taking AP Calculus their senior year.

You don't have kids, obviously.

I have two, both gifted. One exceptionally in math. And personally I have two STEM degrees and work in STEM.

My kids will be fine to have a slightly slower rat race. AP Calc in senior year is reasonable.

We're not convinced calc in senior year is going to be an option without, ironically, summer school/additional instruction. You know... rat race type things.

I was the gifted kid, and I have one myself. It's also not all about 'when you get to calc'. It's ensuring that the kids who pick this up faster aren't so bored that they end up hating math (and their slower peers) forever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Complaining here does nothing. I called my Delegate's office and the staffer clearly new nothing about the plan and just repeated two bullets of information. I said -- the plan seems to eliminate all tracking and honors courses. If you understand differently, please let me know. And if that is the case, please ask the Delegate (also the Speaker) if she supports the elimination of honors classes across the state. Waiting to hear back.

My State Senator asked me to tell him more about the proposal.

I asked our principal how it would effect AAP and she didn't even understand the question. It seemed like she was either out of the loop or ducking.

You need to call your reps. The VA DOE is moving this without explaining the implications to elected officials.

https://whosmy.virginiageneralassembly.gov/

it kills AAP. Do you really think gen ed parents watching their kid's standards plummet won't be quick to point out to the state DOE if there is a subset allowed to flaunt the new rules? It should make TJ hilarious too if the math needed for the science classes can't legally be offered

The standards aren't lowered. More kids will meet them.

Just because you set the bar on the ground, does not mean that more kids are achieving.

It just means that anyone who can walk, crawl or roll can make it over the bar, even if they don't learn a single thing.

The standard is the standard. Today, many students don’t meet those standards. And many others accelerate right past the standards.

If we can rework the system to help more kids meet the standard while the accelerated kids can still get AP calculus, then why not?

We're not convinced more kids will meet the standards. What in VMPI's proposal has convinced you more kids will meet the standards?

[Anonymous]

As a HS teacher, I find this extremely distressing. If anything, we should be increasing expectations across the board for academic achievement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's not LOWERING the standards - it's helping more kids reach the standards. Your UMC kids will still fully meet the standards.

How is this helping more kids meet the standards who didn't before? It's putting them in classes with all the more advanced kids and assuming that having the smarter kids in there will somehow inspire them to do better. (or, assuming that they'll just do group work and therefore the advanced kids will be doing the work for the struggling kids. Which will help them 'meet standards' on paper, but not always in reality.)

From what I've been able to tell, this proposal takes what is currently the 'gen ed' curriculum, makes that the curriculum for everyone. It doesn't raise expectations for anyone (and for many lowers them) and doesn't provide any additional resources (extra instruction time, extra teachers, or curriculum support) to help the struggling kids.

My understanding is that they will do more collaborative work and change the format of the classes. So the classes themselves will look much different and be more engaging for all to cover fewer topics, but more “deeply”.

They having explained yet so it’s still just speculation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's not LOWERING the standards - it's helping more kids reach the standards. Your UMC kids will still fully meet the standards.

How is this helping more kids meet the standards who didn't before? It's putting them in classes with all the more advanced kids and assuming that having the smarter kids in there will somehow inspire them to do better. (or, assuming that they'll just do group work and therefore the advanced kids will be doing the work for the struggling kids. Which will help them 'meet standards' on paper, but not always in reality.)

From what I've been able to tell, this proposal takes what is currently the 'gen ed' curriculum, makes that the curriculum for everyone. It doesn't raise expectations for anyone (and for many lowers them) and doesn't provide any additional resources (extra instruction time, extra teachers, or curriculum support) to help the struggling kids.

Yes, they haven’t shared many details yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if this is starting in 2025, are they just going to make kids repeat concepts? My second grader will be starting 7th grade that year. If he's been in advanced math, working a year ahead of grade level, what's the plan?

I believe it will be a gradual implementation, with your 2nd grader losing the option for asvance math fairly soon after the plan is adopted.

Somewhere says that full implementation for all grades is either 2025 or 2026. The current 7th grade is the class of 2026.

Anyone 7th grade or lower needs to prepare to have a decimated math curriculum in the next year or two.

Another consequence is that a lot of the high school 9th and 10th grade math teachers will leave the profession if they have to teach Algebra and Geometry with all levels in one class.

There won't be classes called algebra and geometry. There will be integrated math 9 and integrated math 10, with the syllabus to be worked out. It looks like they are planning to have topics from algebra and geometry in both classes, with maybe some algebra 2 and trig as well. With all levels in once class, the teacher will probably have to either let the weaker kids fail or go really fast thru the harder topics or drop them entirely.

Such a horrible idea by people who don't care about kids or education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: kids would likely need extra classes outside school to be able to take it, or calculus itself would be a watered down class in Virginia, with the teacher having to do lots of remedial work(presumably the weaker kids would not be in here).
...

You are speculating.

Sure, it's educated speculation based on what VDOE has told us thus far (and what they are/aren't directly answering in terms of questions). Consider:
They have told us 'students will still be able to take calculus'; but they have not explained in detail what classes students take when in order to make that happen.

They have told us that they're eliminating all acceleration. Right now: non accelerated students take Algebra 1 in 9th, Geometry in 10th, Algebra 2 in 11th, and Precalc/something else/nothing in 12th. There is no calculus for these students *unless they take classes outside of school to catch up.*

Understanding that they're planning to rework Algebra 1, geometry, and algebra 2 content into a different sequence: Either this is still going to take roughly 3 years of time to get through the content, OR they're going to drop some topics from the curriculum. They have not revealed what the specific mapping of content is from the old courses to the new, but they have also never stated that they're dropping content. Assuming it's going to take 3 years of time to get through all this course material still, that leaves kids who want calc in 12th having to take precalc with trig (right now a 1 year course) when? This is why we're speculating they're going to have to take it over the summer to be prepared.

The other option we can see is that some content will be dropped from (we're guessing) Algebra 2 and precalc/trig, and they plan to somehow combine those two (currently full year) courses into one year total so that students can still take calc in 12th. We think it's dumb to try and compress large amounts of the high school curriculum when VDOE is insisting that our kids need to all sit through years of repetition in elementary instead of going to algebra when they're ready.

If you can logically see a 'path' to calc that doesn't involve summer school or compressing the HS curriculum in what VMPI has presented thus far, then by all means, tell us what we're missing here.

It did sound like they are going to adjust the content and remap content across the years. It won’t be discrete AGA anymore but topics will be covered over 8-10 grade.

Again, you don’t know - and I don’t know - because they haven’t provided a lot of details. They said they are getting into that over the next two info sessions.