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]PP, if your kid is getting Bs in AIM, I would seriously consider dropping to 7+ next year to repeat prealgebra content with the Illustrative Mathematics curriculum. They need a really strong foundation to do well in algebra and beyond. [/quote]

PP here - yes, that is what I was thinking about.  Any ideas about what is the best way to learn (efficiently, without hand-reviewing every lesson) what concepts are a) being taught in AIM and in 7+; and b) most important for success at future levels?  I'd be interested in providing some at-home support (which I can do myself), but with triage.  DC is a completely neutral student of mathematics - wants to do well in school generally and has a strong urge towards compliance, but has absolutely no curiosity about anything mathematical or scientific.

Maybe this makes DC an outlier on DCUM.  I feel like all I ever hear about is kids who want more math, more math, more math.  Is there anyone out there who feels like this is just way more than necessary, even at the non-accelerated levels?[/quote]

Your MS Math lead should be able to point out some of those things, and can reach back to MXPS central if they need.

There are a lot of different kinds of kids in MCPS. There are some who struggle with the base curriculum, and there are many factors that might contribute, there.  There are those who really, really want to stretch.  There are those for whom the base isn't enough, even with enrichment, but who could use a little support when it gets to accelerated classes.  There are those who are great at Math early, but struggle later, and those who are late bloomers, getting much stronger and surpassing some who had earlier acceleration.

MCPS is good to try to meet the needs of all of these and more.  They don't always hit the target, whether that is related to identification of student ability, ensuring adequate teaching capacity across levels or other challenges.

With those misses come criticisms, some more reasonable than others.  Some more addressable, too.  Many, I think, are engendered by certain MCPS communications deficiencies.

With many on DCUM among those more highly involved in their children's education, with some of the related opportunity coming from advanced coursework and with much of that either in short supply or otherwise gate-kept, the weight of commentary tends to be on the "more Math" side.  But you are right in feeling that there is too much of that, at least there would be from the perspective of student need if there was less missing the target seen.  Or, put another way, that "more Math" energy may be being applied too much in some places but not enough in others.[/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