Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a working tracked system - it needs to be stronger in its selection, and select and track more, rather than less, but overall it's ok.
What's not ok is the SJW rhetoric, and hopefully this will be toned down and turned down a bit for the next 4 years as FCPS will interact with a VDOE less friendly to its ideology.

I'd actually argue (and this is something I think VMPI gets totally wrong) is that we currently *have* differentiation, not tracking. Tracking is a practice from decades ago, where you'd be labelled as 'track 1/2/3' and then that would determine your fate for the rest of your K-12 career. No ability to move up or down. VMPI has stated that's what we have today, but I'd argue *they are wrong*.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a working tracked system - it needs to be stronger in its selection, and select and track more, rather than less, but overall it's ok.
What's not ok is the SJW rhetoric, and hopefully this will be toned down and turned down a bit for the next 4 years as FCPS will interact with a VDOE less friendly to its ideology.

I'd actually argue (and this is something I think VMPI gets totally wrong) is that we currently *have* differentiation, not tracking. Tracking is a practice from decades ago, where you'd be labelled as 'track 1/2/3' and then that would determine your fate for the rest of your K-12 career. No ability to move up or down. VMPI has stated that's what we have today, but I'd argue *they are wrong*.

If you are accelerated in the math curriculum today and do poorly, you can repeat the class to get more foundation. There's nothing preventing that. Likewise, if you suddenly start to 'get' math later than some others, summer school is available to get you caught up to the next level.

What VMPI was (at one point) saying was that we needed homogenous classrooms for equity purposes - everyone who's a grade behind to the kid 3 grade levels above in the same classroom. With 'flexible grouping' to deal with the differences in aptitude.

The problem with that model is, at some point the teacher still has to go over concepts with the whole class, and when one kid gets it on day one and another kid needs it repeated daily for three weeks, you have problems. The only way to avoid that I can see is basically almost always having the groups separate and working on different things... but then there's very little instructional time for each group. At that point, why not separate kids into different classes by ability so that every kid can have more focused, appropriate attention from the teacher?

Anonymous wrote:We have a working tracked system - it needs to be stronger in its selection, and select and track more, rather than less, but overall it's ok.
What's not ok is the SJW rhetoric, and hopefully this will be toned down and turned down a bit for the next 4 years as FCPS will interact with a VDOE less friendly to its ideology.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That first link is about college courses and remedial math.
The second one says they are developing an algebra two class for students to take in junior/senior year to get them ready for college.
Sure doesn't look like they are planning to teach algebra 2 in 8-10th grade spiral as they've been claiming.

The overall goal and theme is supporting more kids on different, advanced math paths. From HS to college.

No need to fret - they talk about blending on the VMPI website:

The content from Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2 is not being eliminated by VMPI, but rather the content of these courses will be blended into a seamless progression of connected learning. This encourages students to connect mathematical concepts and develop a much deeper and more relevant understanding of each concept within its context and relevance.

Yes they said that. And in one of their videos after that they said prealgebra will be in there, which makes sense since these are the classes for all students to take.
If their claim of algebra-geometry-algebra 2 is to be believed, it means they are telling all students they are going to be put on an accelerated pathway, and one that is harder than a year advanced accelerated pathway, because they are throwing in math modeling, statistics and probability too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: But I think the advance math tracks are safe. FCPS is planning on preserving them, and that was before the election.

There was a post in the FCPS forum that said they got an e-mail from their school that Fairfax was moving away from accelerated math and was inviting the parent to a pilot class of teaching multiple levels in the same class.

That’s not what that post said.

"We will hold a virtual meeting for our 3rd and 4th grade parents this evening at 6:00 PM to discuss the math program we are piloting this year. The county is moving away from Advanced Mathematics courses which are focused on acceleration of mathematics concepts and moving toward instruction that provides increased engagement, advanced rigor, and opportunities for ample extemsions. This program is intended to meet the needs of any learners ready for more depth and complexity of the mathematics curriculum. Incorporating math instruction that will help children increase their level of understanding of the math curriculum will help students become more successful as they progress through higher levels of mathematics in middle and high school."

Could you provide more context? Which year, which school?

Don't hold your breath. No details were given the last time someone made this claim. It was never confirmed.

I asked FCPS about it. It's a thing. It's called E3 (E cubed). There's more to it than that email says. They are doing extra on top of the VA SOLs in each grade. They are teaching the teachers as if they were gifted teachers on real differentiation - whether the teachers will be able to do it with 28 students remains to be seen. I can post the info I got from FCPS about it if people want.

Anonymous wrote:This is basically all BS. Our VMPI/VDOE apologist is back again.

But the links are from Texas, and even the material she quotes reads dubious and doesn't help her case.

"Fundamentally new approach to mathematics" - that's a good one. Remember these clowns wanted to send an aspiring cosmetologist to take Logic and Discrete Math because they thought it's job relevant.

Most importantly, let's remember that there's no actual problem to be solved other than the imagined "privilege" that those who excel in Math have to give up according to VMPI proponents like her.

We have a working tracked system - it needs to be stronger in its selection, and select and track more, rather than less, but overall it's ok.
What's not ok is the SJW rhetoric, and hopefully this will be toned down and turned down a bit for the next 4 years as FCPS will interact with a VDOE less friendly to its ideology.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: But I think the advance math tracks are safe. FCPS is planning on preserving them, and that was before the election.

There was a post in the FCPS forum that said they got an e-mail from their school that Fairfax was moving away from accelerated math and was inviting the parent to a pilot class of teaching multiple levels in the same class.

That’s not what that post said.

"We will hold a virtual meeting for our 3rd and 4th grade parents this evening at 6:00 PM to discuss the math program we are piloting this year. The county is moving away from Advanced Mathematics courses which are focused on acceleration of mathematics concepts and moving toward instruction that provides increased engagement, advanced rigor, and opportunities for ample extemsions. This program is intended to meet the needs of any learners ready for more depth and complexity of the mathematics curriculum. Incorporating math instruction that will help children increase their level of understanding of the math curriculum will help students become more successful as they progress through higher levels of mathematics in middle and high school."

Could you provide more context? Which year, which school?

Don't hold your breath. No details were given the last time someone made this claim. It was never confirmed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That first link is about college courses and remedial math.
The second one says they are developing an algebra two class for students to take in junior/senior year to get them ready for college.
Sure doesn't look like they are planning to teach algebra 2 in 8-10th grade spiral as they've been claiming.

The overall goal and theme is supporting more kids on different, advanced math paths. From HS to college.

No need to fret - they talk about blending on the VMPI website:

The content from Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2 is not being eliminated by VMPI, but rather the content of these courses will be blended into a seamless progression of connected learning. This encourages students to connect mathematical concepts and develop a much deeper and more relevant understanding of each concept within its context and relevance.

Anonymous wrote:That first link is about college courses and remedial math.
The second one says they are developing an algebra two class for students to take in junior/senior year to get them ready for college.
Sure doesn't look like they are planning to teach algebra 2 in 8-10th grade spiral as they've been claiming.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
But the VMPI insanity was part of the death by 1,000 cuts that led to the Terry McAuliffe's loss.

I saw a Youngkin ad specifically on VMPI, that he will get rid of it. Said the idea was parents need to give up their privilege for equitable schools.

You didn't put a subject in front of "said" - who said it? The Youngkin ad?

In actuality, this idea (of needing to give up "privilege") comes from the progressive material that is guiding the VMPI effort, which can be found under the additional resources section on their webpage, namely: Mathematics Education through the Lens of Social Justice: Acknowledgement, Actions, and Accountability a joint position statement from the National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics and TODOS: Mathematics for ALL, 2016 which states that:

"Mathematics teachers and leaders must self-reflect on privileges",
"a social justice stance interrogates and challenges the roles power, privilege, and oppression play in the current unjust system of mathematics education—and in society as a whole."
"some benefit by the current system and the differentiated status associated with it. Giving up privilege is difficult, even if it is the right thing to do."

That is gross indeed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: But I think the advance math tracks are safe. FCPS is planning on preserving them, and that was before the election.

There was a post in the FCPS forum that said they got an e-mail from their school that Fairfax was moving away from accelerated math and was inviting the parent to a pilot class of teaching multiple levels in the same class.

That’s not what that post said.

"We will hold a virtual meeting for our 3rd and 4th grade parents this evening at 6:00 PM to discuss the math program we are piloting this year. The county is moving away from Advanced Mathematics courses which are focused on acceleration of mathematics concepts and moving toward instruction that provides increased engagement, advanced rigor, and opportunities for ample extemsions. This program is intended to meet the needs of any learners ready for more depth and complexity of the mathematics curriculum. Incorporating math instruction that will help children increase their level of understanding of the math curriculum will help students become more successful as they progress through higher levels of mathematics in middle and high school."

Could you provide more context? Which year, which school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: But I think the advance math tracks are safe. FCPS is planning on preserving them, and that was before the election.

There was a post in the FCPS forum that said they got an e-mail from their school that Fairfax was moving away from accelerated math and was inviting the parent to a pilot class of teaching multiple levels in the same class.

That’s not what that post said.

"We will hold a virtual meeting for our 3rd and 4th grade parents this evening at 6:00 PM to discuss the math program we are piloting this year. The county is moving away from Advanced Mathematics courses which are focused on acceleration of mathematics concepts and moving toward instruction that provides increased engagement, advanced rigor, and opportunities for ample extemsions. This program is intended to meet the needs of any learners ready for more depth and complexity of the mathematics curriculum. Incorporating math instruction that will help children increase their level of understanding of the math curriculum will help students become more successful as they progress through higher levels of mathematics in middle and high school."

Could you provide more context? Which year, which school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
But the VMPI insanity was part of the death by 1,000 cuts that led to the Terry McAuliffe's loss.

I saw a Youngkin ad specifically on VMPI, that he will get rid of it. Said the idea was parents need to give up their privilege for equitable schools.