Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I keep hearing is that the powers that be “don’t want to gatekeep rigor” and “parents should be able to decide.”

I have a few theories. The FCPS math office people HATE 6th grade algebra 1 (they aren’t fans of advanced math in elementary in general and already managed to essentially get rid of it for 3rd-4th grade). The terrible rollout and worse eligibility change for next year are so bad I wonder if there’s an element of malicious compliance/self-sabotage.

No this is all Reid’s idea. Every principal thinks this is bonkers. It is like she does whatever she wants and the SB is clueless.

This right here. There is no academic research that shows what she is doing is helpful for students. And while hyper-acceleration might be good for some, there are many, many students who are being harmed by this and their parents are clueless. The medical profession has a saying - “Do no harm”, but apparently school superintendents (Reid) goes unchecked with many of her decisions.

How are they being harmed? Even if they get a C, they can just repeat it in 7th without any trouble.

1) The poor grade comes from missing foundational instruction that the child is unable to compensate for. Repeating the course may allow the student to cobble together a better grade by memorizing procedures, etc, but the deeper understanding and true mastery is still not there. This means the student has a weak foundation for the rest of their math courses.

2) It’s harmful to their confidence and self-image. This is an 11-year-old child. Why intentionally set them up for failure, or for a slog where they have to give up down time and other activities for tutoring just to have ti retake it anyway?

3) Teachers are trained to support every student as much as they can, but their time, bandwidth, and attention are limited. Putting obviously unprepared students in the class diverts the teacher’s attention from the prepared students (who are also skipping 2 years of instruction), bringing down the entire class.

1) the foundational prealgebra topics' mastery should be measured by the SOL so kids missing it shouldn't be eligible for 6th grade algebra in the first place. Also, kids in 6th grade algebra class will likely be missing similar material (that which would have been covered in 6th grade prealgebra), which makes it easy for the teacher to cover/scaffold v.s. most classes where each kid has different gaps.

2) Getting a C in 6th grade algebra followed by an A in 7th grade algebra is no more a failure than getting an A in 6th grade prealgebra followed by an A in 7th grade algebra.

3) Every class will have C students. I'm not talking about students who get a D or F because they never learned how to add or multiply fractions.

It's an Algebra 1 Honors course. There is a lot of material that needs to be taught. No, it is not "easy" for a teacher to fill in a number of instructional gaps for students who are not prepared for the course, even if the students all have the same gaps. Unless we want to completely water down what is considered Algebra 1 Honors, which is probably what will happen, so that parents can brag about how accelerated their 6th graders are in math.

Kids have gaps (less correlated ones, which is worse) in 7th, 8th, and 9th grade algebra 1, which teachers remediate and scaffold to the best of their ability. Should the fact that kids in 8th grade algebra have gaps and get CS mean that everyone should be forced to take it in 9th or later?

Nobody said that and the kids you're referring to aren't taking Algebra 1 Honors. This was in reponse to how "easy" it will be to fill the gaps kids will have from skipping two years of math while simultaneously teaching Algebra 1 Honors. It won't be.

And the magical Algebra 1 Honors teachers you're envisioning to fill these gaps don't exist. Very, very few teachers at the elementary level are licensed to teach Algebra. Provisionally licensened teachers and/or virtual classes will be common.

And any teacher with common sense knows they can't make up for two years of math in addition to teaching Algebra. This is one of the stupidest ideas FCPS has had in awhile. And there have been many.

Reid needs to be fired. She is incompetent and doing MANY things that are not in the best interest of students or teachers.

Fired? Interesting thought, but chances of that happening when down a lot with the Algebra 1 pilot program. There are 700+ 6th grade Algebra 1 parents thanking Reid for finally looking into needs of advanced students. Before this, all focus was on gen-ed and remedial.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I keep hearing is that the powers that be “don’t want to gatekeep rigor” and “parents should be able to decide.”

I have a few theories. The FCPS math office people HATE 6th grade algebra 1 (they aren’t fans of advanced math in elementary in general and already managed to essentially get rid of it for 3rd-4th grade). The terrible rollout and worse eligibility change for next year are so bad I wonder if there’s an element of malicious compliance/self-sabotage.

No this is all Reid’s idea. Every principal thinks this is bonkers. It is like she does whatever she wants and the SB is clueless.

This right here. There is no academic research that shows what she is doing is helpful for students. And while hyper-acceleration might be good for some, there are many, many students who are being harmed by this and their parents are clueless. The medical profession has a saying - “Do no harm”, but apparently school superintendents (Reid) goes unchecked with many of her decisions.

How are they being harmed? Even if they get a C, they can just repeat it in 7th without any trouble.

1) The poor grade comes from missing foundational instruction that the child is unable to compensate for. Repeating the course may allow the student to cobble together a better grade by memorizing procedures, etc, but the deeper understanding and true mastery is still not there. This means the student has a weak foundation for the rest of their math courses.

2) It’s harmful to their confidence and self-image. This is an 11-year-old child. Why intentionally set them up for failure, or for a slog where they have to give up down time and other activities for tutoring just to have ti retake it anyway?

3) Teachers are trained to support every student as much as they can, but their time, bandwidth, and attention are limited. Putting obviously unprepared students in the class diverts the teacher’s attention from the prepared students (who are also skipping 2 years of instruction), bringing down the entire class.

1) the foundational prealgebra topics' mastery should be measured by the SOL so kids missing it shouldn't be eligible for 6th grade algebra in the first place. Also, kids in 6th grade algebra class will likely be missing similar material (that which would have been covered in 6th grade prealgebra), which makes it easy for the teacher to cover/scaffold v.s. most classes where each kid has different gaps.

2) Getting a C in 6th grade algebra followed by an A in 7th grade algebra is no more a failure than getting an A in 6th grade prealgebra followed by an A in 7th grade algebra.

3) Every class will have C students. I'm not talking about students who get a D or F because they never learned how to add or multiply fractions.

It's an Algebra 1 Honors course. There is a lot of material that needs to be taught. No, it is not "easy" for a teacher to fill in a number of instructional gaps for students who are not prepared for the course, even if the students all have the same gaps. Unless we want to completely water down what is considered Algebra 1 Honors, which is probably what will happen, so that parents can brag about how accelerated their 6th graders are in math.

Kids have gaps (less correlated ones, which is worse) in 7th, 8th, and 9th grade algebra 1, which teachers remediate and scaffold to the best of their ability. Should the fact that kids in 8th grade algebra have gaps and get CS mean that everyone should be forced to take it in 9th or later?

Nobody said that and the kids you're referring to aren't taking Algebra 1 Honors. This was in reponse to how "easy" it will be to fill the gaps kids will have from skipping two years of math while simultaneously teaching Algebra 1 Honors. It won't be.

And the magical Algebra 1 Honors teachers you're envisioning to fill these gaps don't exist. Very, very few teachers at the elementary level are licensed to teach Algebra. Provisionally licensened teachers and/or virtual classes will be common.

And any teacher with common sense knows they can't make up for two years of math in addition to teaching Algebra. This is one of the stupidest ideas FCPS has had in awhile. And there have been many.

Reid needs to be fired. She is incompetent and doing MANY things that are not in the best interest of students or teachers.

Fired? Interesting thought, but chances of that happening when down a lot with the Algebra 1 pilot program. There are 700+ 6th grade Algebra 1 parents thanking Reid for finally looking into needs of advanced students. Before this, all focus was on gen-ed and remedial.

I doubt that there are 700 happy parents. There are parentsopenly discussing their kids struggling. There are parents discussing expunging the grade and retaking the class. There are parents whose kids dropped down a grade. There are parents who are currently upset that the county is opting kids into an advanced class instead of leaving that choice to the parents.

It seems to me like there are a good number of parents who are not happy with what FCPS is doing.

I don't have a problem with 6th graders taking A1H but they should all be required to take the class in person, that might mean moving to a center from their base school. Kids should have to test in with MAP scores AND the IAAT AND a passed advanced score on the SOL if they are taking A1H before 8th grade.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I keep hearing is that the powers that be “don’t want to gatekeep rigor” and “parents should be able to decide.”

I have a few theories. The FCPS math office people HATE 6th grade algebra 1 (they aren’t fans of advanced math in elementary in general and already managed to essentially get rid of it for 3rd-4th grade). The terrible rollout and worse eligibility change for next year are so bad I wonder if there’s an element of malicious compliance/self-sabotage.

No this is all Reid’s idea. Every principal thinks this is bonkers. It is like she does whatever she wants and the SB is clueless.

This right here. There is no academic research that shows what she is doing is helpful for students. And while hyper-acceleration might be good for some, there are many, many students who are being harmed by this and their parents are clueless. The medical profession has a saying - “Do no harm”, but apparently school superintendents (Reid) goes unchecked with many of her decisions.

How are they being harmed? Even if they get a C, they can just repeat it in 7th without any trouble.

1) The poor grade comes from missing foundational instruction that the child is unable to compensate for. Repeating the course may allow the student to cobble together a better grade by memorizing procedures, etc, but the deeper understanding and true mastery is still not there. This means the student has a weak foundation for the rest of their math courses.

2) It’s harmful to their confidence and self-image. This is an 11-year-old child. Why intentionally set them up for failure, or for a slog where they have to give up down time and other activities for tutoring just to have ti retake it anyway?

3) Teachers are trained to support every student as much as they can, but their time, bandwidth, and attention are limited. Putting obviously unprepared students in the class diverts the teacher’s attention from the prepared students (who are also skipping 2 years of instruction), bringing down the entire class.

1) the foundational prealgebra topics' mastery should be measured by the SOL so kids missing it shouldn't be eligible for 6th grade algebra in the first place. Also, kids in 6th grade algebra class will likely be missing similar material (that which would have been covered in 6th grade prealgebra), which makes it easy for the teacher to cover/scaffold v.s. most classes where each kid has different gaps.

2) Getting a C in 6th grade algebra followed by an A in 7th grade algebra is no more a failure than getting an A in 6th grade prealgebra followed by an A in 7th grade algebra.

3) Every class will have C students. I'm not talking about students who get a D or F because they never learned how to add or multiply fractions.

It's an Algebra 1 Honors course. There is a lot of material that needs to be taught. No, it is not "easy" for a teacher to fill in a number of instructional gaps for students who are not prepared for the course, even if the students all have the same gaps. Unless we want to completely water down what is considered Algebra 1 Honors, which is probably what will happen, so that parents can brag about how accelerated their 6th graders are in math.

Kids have gaps (less correlated ones, which is worse) in 7th, 8th, and 9th grade algebra 1, which teachers remediate and scaffold to the best of their ability. Should the fact that kids in 8th grade algebra have gaps and get CS mean that everyone should be forced to take it in 9th or later?

Nobody said that and the kids you're referring to aren't taking Algebra 1 Honors. This was in reponse to how "easy" it will be to fill the gaps kids will have from skipping two years of math while simultaneously teaching Algebra 1 Honors. It won't be.

And the magical Algebra 1 Honors teachers you're envisioning to fill these gaps don't exist. Very, very few teachers at the elementary level are licensed to teach Algebra. Provisionally licensened teachers and/or virtual classes will be common.

And any teacher with common sense knows they can't make up for two years of math in addition to teaching Algebra. This is one of the stupidest ideas FCPS has had in awhile. And there have been many.

Reid needs to be fired. She is incompetent and doing MANY things that are not in the best interest of students or teachers.

Fired? Interesting thought, but chances of that happening when down a lot with the Algebra 1 pilot program. There are 700+ 6th grade Algebra 1 parents thanking Reid for finally looking into needs of advanced students. Before this, all focus was on gen-ed and remedial.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I keep hearing is that the powers that be “don’t want to gatekeep rigor” and “parents should be able to decide.”

I have a few theories. The FCPS math office people HATE 6th grade algebra 1 (they aren’t fans of advanced math in elementary in general and already managed to essentially get rid of it for 3rd-4th grade). The terrible rollout and worse eligibility change for next year are so bad I wonder if there’s an element of malicious compliance/self-sabotage.

No this is all Reid’s idea. Every principal thinks this is bonkers. It is like she does whatever she wants and the SB is clueless.

This right here. There is no academic research that shows what she is doing is helpful for students. And while hyper-acceleration might be good for some, there are many, many students who are being harmed by this and their parents are clueless. The medical profession has a saying - “Do no harm”, but apparently school superintendents (Reid) goes unchecked with many of her decisions.

How are they being harmed? Even if they get a C, they can just repeat it in 7th without any trouble.

1) The poor grade comes from missing foundational instruction that the child is unable to compensate for. Repeating the course may allow the student to cobble together a better grade by memorizing procedures, etc, but the deeper understanding and true mastery is still not there. This means the student has a weak foundation for the rest of their math courses.

2) It’s harmful to their confidence and self-image. This is an 11-year-old child. Why intentionally set them up for failure, or for a slog where they have to give up down time and other activities for tutoring just to have ti retake it anyway?

3) Teachers are trained to support every student as much as they can, but their time, bandwidth, and attention are limited. Putting obviously unprepared students in the class diverts the teacher’s attention from the prepared students (who are also skipping 2 years of instruction), bringing down the entire class.

1) the foundational prealgebra topics' mastery should be measured by the SOL so kids missing it shouldn't be eligible for 6th grade algebra in the first place. Also, kids in 6th grade algebra class will likely be missing similar material (that which would have been covered in 6th grade prealgebra), which makes it easy for the teacher to cover/scaffold v.s. most classes where each kid has different gaps.

2) Getting a C in 6th grade algebra followed by an A in 7th grade algebra is no more a failure than getting an A in 6th grade prealgebra followed by an A in 7th grade algebra.

3) Every class will have C students. I'm not talking about students who get a D or F because they never learned how to add or multiply fractions.

It's an Algebra 1 Honors course. There is a lot of material that needs to be taught. No, it is not "easy" for a teacher to fill in a number of instructional gaps for students who are not prepared for the course, even if the students all have the same gaps. Unless we want to completely water down what is considered Algebra 1 Honors, which is probably what will happen, so that parents can brag about how accelerated their 6th graders are in math.

Kids have gaps (less correlated ones, which is worse) in 7th, 8th, and 9th grade algebra 1, which teachers remediate and scaffold to the best of their ability. Should the fact that kids in 8th grade algebra have gaps and get CS mean that everyone should be forced to take it in 9th or later?

Nobody said that and the kids you're referring to aren't taking Algebra 1 Honors. This was in reponse to how "easy" it will be to fill the gaps kids will have from skipping two years of math while simultaneously teaching Algebra 1 Honors. It won't be.

And the magical Algebra 1 Honors teachers you're envisioning to fill these gaps don't exist. Very, very few teachers at the elementary level are licensed to teach Algebra. Provisionally licensened teachers and/or virtual classes will be common.

And any teacher with common sense knows they can't make up for two years of math in addition to teaching Algebra. This is one of the stupidest ideas FCPS has had in awhile. And there have been many.

Reid needs to be fired. She is incompetent and doing MANY things that are not in the best interest of students or teachers.

Anonymous wrote:My average student who is pretty decent in math took Algebra 1 Honors in 8th grade and it was SO hard. I can't imagine anyone doing it in 6th grade who is not a complete math genius and just really an excellent student who wants to take on the challenge. Aside from that, why push it?

Anonymous wrote:My average student who is pretty decent in math took Algebra 1 Honors in 8th grade and it was SO hard. I can't imagine anyone doing it in 6th grade who is not a complete math genius and just really an excellent student who wants to take on the challenge. Aside from that, why push it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your ES should have sent you an email about opting in or out but it is dependent on SOL

We have not gotten any notice from our ES. This is for non-aap adv. Math in 5th.

You may have gotten left off the list for the email by mistake. Any student who completes advanced 5th grade math and passes the SOL is eligible, even if they are not in full time AAP. Check the Digital Consent System to see if the opt in/out choice is there for you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your ES should have sent you an email about opting in or out but it is dependent on SOL

We have not gotten any notice from our ES. This is for non-aap adv. Math in 5th.

Anonymous wrote:Your ES should have sent you an email about opting in or out but it is dependent on SOL

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I keep hearing is that the powers that be “don’t want to gatekeep rigor” and “parents should be able to decide.”

I have a few theories. The FCPS math office people HATE 6th grade algebra 1 (they aren’t fans of advanced math in elementary in general and already managed to essentially get rid of it for 3rd-4th grade). The terrible rollout and worse eligibility change for next year are so bad I wonder if there’s an element of malicious compliance/self-sabotage.

No this is all Reid’s idea. Every principal thinks this is bonkers. It is like she does whatever she wants and the SB is clueless.

This right here. There is no academic research that shows what she is doing is helpful for students. And while hyper-acceleration might be good for some, there are many, many students who are being harmed by this and their parents are clueless. The medical profession has a saying - “Do no harm”, but apparently school superintendents (Reid) goes unchecked with many of her decisions.

How are they being harmed? Even if they get a C, they can just repeat it in 7th without any trouble.

1) The poor grade comes from missing foundational instruction that the child is unable to compensate for. Repeating the course may allow the student to cobble together a better grade by memorizing procedures, etc, but the deeper understanding and true mastery is still not there. This means the student has a weak foundation for the rest of their math courses.

2) It’s harmful to their confidence and self-image. This is an 11-year-old child. Why intentionally set them up for failure, or for a slog where they have to give up down time and other activities for tutoring just to have ti retake it anyway?

3) Teachers are trained to support every student as much as they can, but their time, bandwidth, and attention are limited. Putting obviously unprepared students in the class diverts the teacher’s attention from the prepared students (who are also skipping 2 years of instruction), bringing down the entire class.

1) the foundational prealgebra topics' mastery should be measured by the SOL so kids missing it shouldn't be eligible for 6th grade algebra in the first place. Also, kids in 6th grade algebra class will likely be missing similar material (that which would have been covered in 6th grade prealgebra), which makes it easy for the teacher to cover/scaffold v.s. most classes where each kid has different gaps.

They are allowing anyone who passes the 6th grade math SOL in advanced 5th grade math to take Algebra 1. Passing requires getting about 65% of the questions correct. If they were still requiring a Pass Advanced and had a cutoff MAP score, it would be different.