Reply to MCPS is cuttting compacted math and cohorted literacy enrichment

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "MCPS is cuttting compacted math and cohorted literacy enrichment"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Pp mentions that the REAL issue is that this model has kids doing Pre-Calculus in 9th grade, but then Calculus A/B and B/C in succession.What is wrong here? I am not familiar with the math progression here. I am a foreigner. The issue is too difficult or should not break caclcus in A to C, or miss the curriculum of geometry or statistics? Does that mean parents should supplement on their own like IXL, RSM, or AOPS outside of school in some years?   I am from Asia, so I am confused what all these mean. [/quote]

I'm that PP, and here's my issue with that progression.

[b]Current system[/b]

Right now, your standard "bright" kid who took compacted math in 4th grade will end up in Honors Pre-Calculus in 10th grade. That's a real crucible year for a lot of kids, and it's not uncommon for kids to take the "off-ramp" in 10th and drop down to On-Level Pre-Calculus.

Whether they did Honors or On-Level, the kids who finished Pre-Calculus then choose between Calculus AB and Calculus BC. This is another "off-ramp" of sorts because kids who did okay in Honors Pre-Calculus but are not interested in STEM will often take Calculus AB their junior year. The kids who want a STEM career or for whom math comes a bit easier take BC immediately after Pre-Calculus.

It's pretty uncommon to take AB and then BC because it means repeating the entire B section. A kid who is good at math isn't going to want or need that repeated material.

[b]Proposed new system[/b]

The proposed new system seems "off" in two ways.

First, Pre-Calculus is moved to 9th grade for the vast majority of kids. Now, we know that under the current system even kids who were "compacted" struggle mightily in Pre-Calculus, and MCPS wants to move it a year earlier AND put more kids into that class?

But then they screw it up a different way, by projecting those kids out to taking Calculus AB in 10th and BC in 11th.

That's a stupid progression and I suspect they know it. It forces "bright-but-not math-oriented" kids into Calculus a year earlier than the current progression, and it ALSO screws over kids ready for BC directly after Pre-Calculus.

[b]What they are trying to cover up is that they don't have enough math available for kids to take in HS if they take Pre-Calculus in 9th. [/b] That's why I said parents need to keep their eye on the ball here. They are stretching Calculus into two years so that you don't notice that a math-oriented kid will run out of math classes in 11th grade. [/quote]
Also no advanced math student needs to take calc AB and then BC.  They should look at the SMCS  pathways for very advanced learners.

I do agree with the current broken state of acceleration. Way too many kids pushed ahead and the wealthy ones propped up with tutors.  [/quote]

I'm this PP and I agree, BUT....MCPS did this to themselves.

I have a kid who probably should have been on the regular track, and has been "propped up" (successfully!) by tutors ever since Honors Pre-Calculus. However, we didn't really have a choice. At the time, MCPS put more than half of the kids in my child's (Title 1) school into compacted math. That meant that the on-level math progression was basically all kids who were far behind grade level for whatever reason. So they created a too-fast track and put every single English speaking middle class kid onto that track and then wished them luck moving forward.

[/quote]
agree, MCPS swings wildly one way, then wildly the other way.

They first put too many kids in CM. Now they want to take it away completely.

They took away SROs completely (even though all HS Principals  asked them not to), then decided to bring in CEOs because, gosh darn it, who knew problem kids wouldn't stop their bad behavior, then now after several gun incidents, there's talk again of bringing back SROs.

They are constantly trying the best new thing on our kids and treating them like guinea pigs.  I feel like it's a way to justify the existence of some central office staff.
[/quote]

DP.

They wouldn't be swinging one way and another as much if

1) the Maryland State Department of Education didn't keep handing down new requirements that they had to follow with about as much meaningful engagement with the local school systems needing to implement them (say, to ensure they don't purchase a curriculum for a multi-year-year period that will not meet a new MSDE requirement planned, but not made widely known, going into effect in year 2 of the purchase agreement) as MCPS tends to give to to the community when it makes its own decisions, and

2) the County not only met the funding needs as proposed, but offered amounts commensurate with ensuring adequate delivery of education [i]to individuals across the entire system[/i] such that needs were met equivalently no matter where a student went to school (so that MCPS wasn't constantly trying to address the inequities resulting from current funding/dleivery paradigms with the "next thing"), and

3) MCPS decided to collaborate proactively with MSDE in the first instance and faithfully dedicated county funding to the ends described in the second.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics