Reply to Applied Investigation into Mathematics 6

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Applied Investigation into Mathematics 6"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Does AIM=AMP 7+ ?[/quote]

AIM compacts 7th and 8th grade standards.

7+ is the 2nd half of 7th and 8th.

So for 7+ you are not getting a half-year of 7th. 7+ is supposed to be for 7th graders who completed 6+ in 6th (which is all of 6th and the first half of 7th). [/quote]

See the post inmediately prior.  Each option, AIM or AMP7+, with their different curricular origin, ends up missing some things on the way to Algebra.[/quote]

Agree. But our school (which offers AIM) says that they rework algebra 1 to cover the missing topics. [/quote]

This is what a number of schools have chosen to do.  I personally think they should just stop the madness and use Illustrated Mathematics from 6th through Alg2.  Then create two Alg tracks: 
-3 yr Integrated Algebra  
- Compacted Integrated Algebra

Acceleration from ES could then look like:
Compacted Continuation
6th- AMP 7/8 : All of 7th /half of 8th
7th- AMP8+ : half of 8th/ Half Alg 1
8th- Alg1+ : half Alg 1 /half Alg 2
9th- Alg2+: Half Alg2/  half Alg3
10th- Alg3+ half Alg 3 / Applications
OR Accelerated: 
6th- AMP 7/8+ : All of 7th and 8th
7th- Alg 1
8th- Alg2
9th- Alg3
OR:

They would get to the same place and students would have a better foundation with no missed content. Students take the Algebra MCAP after Alg3. And because I don’t trust them to get the integration correct, they should form a committee to help them craft the pacing guide (1 excellent teacher from Pre-Alg through Pre-Cal plus an Engineer)(7-8 committee members)[/quote]

Would be interesting, and maybe better, but the only things that the purchased curricula (Eureka & Illustrative Math) come with is 6+ & 7+.  AIM is a holdover from the proprietary C2.0, which no longer met standards (among other problems) and 4/5 & 5/6, while following the CM paradigm of C2.0, had to be reworked to blend Eureka elementary and Illustrative Math middle.  That, itself, was no small feat.  The compaction isn't just linear, going 1.5 times as fast, it moves modules around so that some of the overlapping spiral from each grade is handled at once and towards the higher level, instead of twice.

To do what you suggest would require development of another entirely proprietary curriculum.  That would take a long time and a lot of resources that they just don't have.  I'm not sure the entire central Math group has 7-8 employees, much less 7-8 with free time to form a separately mandated committee. They'd also run into trouble with the unflexible state standard for a credit (full year) of Algebra and a credit of Geometry, requiring at least a waiver and, more likely, a whole series of justifications/detailed alignments/etc.

Maybe with a generous US Department of Education grant aimed at curricular innovations they could pull together resources for something like that to be done, but MCPS' experience with C2.0 means they probably wouldn't even try for such.

Still, an interesting thought experiment.[/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