Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone link the list of E3 schools?

FCPS has not released a list of the 20 (+?) E3 schools . . .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone link the list of E3 schools?

FCPS has not released a list of the 20 (+?) E3 schools. Schools which are mentioned as having E3 are:
Bailey's Upper (began 2021-22, 3rd & 4th), Herndon, Lake Anne, Lane (began 21-22, 3rd & 4th), Lynbrook, Rolling Valley, Union Mill (began 21-22), Virginia Run (began 22-23, perhaps just for 3rd).

If you know of others, please add to the list. It will be useful once SOL scores are released this summer to see what is happening with 5th grade students in these schools.

Anonymous wrote:FCPS wants MORE kids accelerating in math.


Strategic Plan 2023-30

Goal #3 - Academic Growth and Excellence

Every student will acquire critical and creative thinking skills, meet/exceed high academic standards, and achieve their highest academic potential.

Measures

A. Growth and performance in coursework (e.g., course grades, grade point average [GPA], meeting Individualized Education Program [IEP] goals, and language acquisition goals) (including students with 504s)
B. Growth and performance on state/national/international assessments in reading, math, social studies, and science
C. Successful completion of Algebra 1 by 8th grade
D. Evidence of progression towards or successful completion of advanced coursework (e.g., Honors, Advanced Placement [AP], International Baccalaureate [IB], dual enrollment, Career and Technical Education [CTE], etc.)
E. Growth with evidence in at least one/two self-identified Portrait of a Graduate skills, annually
F. Students reading on grade level by the end of 3rd grade

https://www.fcps.edu/strategic-plan

Anonymous wrote:Can someone link the list of E3 schools?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God forbid kids from lower income families get the chance to do advanced math too. Rich people gotta hoard, hoard, hoard!

San Francisco's math track has been a pure disaster. Everyone admits it now. It harmed high achieving students, low achieving students, URMs, everyone.

That’s not FCPS’s E3.

Neither is the PP's post about lower income families and hoarding.

San Francisco is relevant because their goal, to increase math attainment particularly for URMs, by creating a single math track for everyone, failed everyone. It did not achieve its goal. And it didn't help URMs or any students. It's a bad idea. Irrefutably.

That is NOT what E3 advocates for. They want more kids in accelerated tracks.

And it has nothing to do with SF.

Stop spreading misinformation.

E3 waters down math instruction by placing students in heterogeneous math classes in 3rd and 4th grade. Students at both ends of the achievement spectrum suffer as even good teachers can't differentiate in heterogeneous classes as well as teachers can in classrooms matched to student needs. Heterogeneous classes were the backbone of San Francisco's math reform.

Now, if you’re posting in good faith, please share the key differences between the SF math and E3.

Crickets.

You know they really aren’t comparable.

Heterogeneous classes in both.

SF had all kids wait until 9th for Algebra 1.

E3 alliance pushes to get MORE kids in Algebra in 8th.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God forbid kids from lower income families get the chance to do advanced math too. Rich people gotta hoard, hoard, hoard!

San Francisco's math track has been a pure disaster. Everyone admits it now. It harmed high achieving students, low achieving students, URMs, everyone.

That’s not FCPS’s E3.

Neither is the PP's post about lower income families and hoarding.

San Francisco is relevant because their goal, to increase math attainment particularly for URMs, by creating a single math track for everyone, failed everyone. It did not achieve its goal. And it didn't help URMs or any students. It's a bad idea. Irrefutably.

That is NOT what E3 advocates for. They want more kids in accelerated tracks.

And it has nothing to do with SF.

Stop spreading misinformation.

E3 waters down math instruction by placing students in heterogeneous math classes in 3rd and 4th grade. Students at both ends of the achievement spectrum suffer as even good teachers can't differentiate in heterogeneous classes as well as teachers can in classrooms matched to student needs. Heterogeneous classes were the backbone of San Francisco's math reform.

Now, if you’re posting in good faith, please share the key differences between the SF math and E3.

Crickets.

You know they really aren’t comparable.

Heterogeneous classes in both.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God forbid kids from lower income families get the chance to do advanced math too. Rich people gotta hoard, hoard, hoard!

San Francisco's math track has been a pure disaster. Everyone admits it now. It harmed high achieving students, low achieving students, URMs, everyone.

That’s not FCPS’s E3.

Neither is the PP's post about lower income families and hoarding.

San Francisco is relevant because their goal, to increase math attainment particularly for URMs, by creating a single math track for everyone, failed everyone. It did not achieve its goal. And it didn't help URMs or any students. It's a bad idea. Irrefutably.

That is NOT what E3 advocates for. They want more kids in accelerated tracks.

And it has nothing to do with SF.

Stop spreading misinformation.

E3 waters down math instruction by placing students in heterogeneous math classes in 3rd and 4th grade. Students at both ends of the achievement spectrum suffer as even good teachers can't differentiate in heterogeneous classes as well as teachers can in classrooms matched to student needs. Heterogeneous classes were the backbone of San Francisco's math reform.

Now, if you’re posting in good faith, please share the key differences between the SF math and E3.

Crickets.

You know they really aren’t comparable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God forbid kids from lower income families get the chance to do advanced math too. Rich people gotta hoard, hoard, hoard!

San Francisco's math track has been a pure disaster. Everyone admits it now. It harmed high achieving students, low achieving students, URMs, everyone.

That’s not FCPS’s E3.

Neither is the PP's post about lower income families and hoarding.

San Francisco is relevant because their goal, to increase math attainment particularly for URMs, by creating a single math track for everyone, failed everyone. It did not achieve its goal. And it didn't help URMs or any students. It's a bad idea. Irrefutably.

That is NOT what E3 advocates for. They want more kids in accelerated tracks.

And it has nothing to do with SF.

Stop spreading misinformation.

E3 waters down math instruction by placing students in heterogeneous math classes in 3rd and 4th grade. Students at both ends of the achievement spectrum suffer as even good teachers can't differentiate in heterogeneous classes as well as teachers can in classrooms matched to student needs. Heterogeneous classes were the backbone of San Francisco's math reform.

Now, if you’re posting in good faith, please share the key differences between the SF math and E3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At our LLIV orientation, the AART made it sound like the E3 math at our school (who had piloted it for the last year or two, I think) was going away.

May I ask which elementary this is?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an AAP student with math as her strongest area and a student in special education with math as her absolute weakest area. I *hate* the idea of my child with a math learning disability sitting in a classroom with advanced math students. She already struggles and has low academic self esteem. If she's in a room with advanced students who will steamroll the class discussions because they already know what they're being taught and pick it up quicker, she will complete disappear into the woodwork. She's terrified of being perceived as "dumb" and this will just make it worse. I understand there are concerns with the advanced students losing their advanced curriculum which is significant. But I feel like these discussions (at the county level, not here) never consider how the special education students will struggle in this setup.

Agree completely. E3 is another terrible equity-driven idea which will ultimately hurt every student, including those it claims to want to help.

FCPS needs to dump E3 entirely.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God forbid kids from lower income families get the chance to do advanced math too. Rich people gotta hoard, hoard, hoard!

San Francisco's math track has been a pure disaster. Everyone admits it now. It harmed high achieving students, low achieving students, URMs, everyone.

That’s not FCPS’s E3.

Neither is the PP's post about lower income families and hoarding.

San Francisco is relevant because their goal, to increase math attainment particularly for URMs, by creating a single math track for everyone, failed everyone. It did not achieve its goal. And it didn't help URMs or any students. It's a bad idea. Irrefutably.

That is NOT what E3 advocates for. They want more kids in accelerated tracks.

And it has nothing to do with SF.

Stop spreading misinformation.

E3 waters down math instruction by placing students in heterogeneous math classes in 3rd and 4th grade. Students at both ends of the achievement spectrum suffer as even good teachers can't differentiate in heterogeneous classes as well as teachers can in classrooms matched to student needs. Heterogeneous classes were the backbone of San Francisco's math reform.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God forbid kids from lower income families get the chance to do advanced math too. Rich people gotta hoard, hoard, hoard!

San Francisco's math track has been a pure disaster. Everyone admits it now. It harmed high achieving students, low achieving students, URMs, everyone.

That’s not FCPS’s E3.

Neither is the PP's post about lower income families and hoarding.

San Francisco is relevant because their goal, to increase math attainment particularly for URMs, by creating a single math track for everyone, failed everyone. It did not achieve its goal. And it didn't help URMs or any students. It's a bad idea. Irrefutably.

That is NOT what E3 advocates for. They want more kids in accelerated tracks.

And it has nothing to do with SF.

Stop spreading misinformation.