The contention here seems to be that the way that math is taught in the US, separating out by subject, is better. However, given that the rest of the world mostly does not teach it this way and that the US does not rank particularly highly when it comes to math standards, the evidence not seem supportive that it is better.

Anonymous wrote:All of the assessments are word problems which depend on reading ability. None of them are straight computation. My math tests used to be straight computation problems. If they are all word problems, you aren't really testing one's math ability.

State testing like MCAP is all word problems.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Integrated math is taught poorly and doesn’t go in depth. Most district that try it switch back to Algebra and Geometry.

But the question is, why is it taught poorly?

Because there’s not enough time to go in depth, so the teacher does a quick review of a small number of topics each year.

As mentioned in the thread, other integrated math classes like IB are not very good. High level classes like AP Calculus and Statistics are focused on an overarching theme. For building connections it’s easy to set a few hours to study for example applications of algebra in geometry.

For integrated math there’s no opportunity to accelerate, which dissuades top students from following that route.

In which school district?

Integrated math is sequential so one has to do them in order, eg IM 1, IM 2, IM 3. Algebra and Geometry courses can be taken concurrently and students can double up in math in a given year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Integrated math is taught poorly and doesn’t go in depth. Most district that try it switch back to Algebra and Geometry.

But the question is, why is it taught poorly?

Because there’s not enough time to go in depth, so the teacher does a quick review of a small number of topics each year.

As mentioned in the thread, other integrated math classes like IB are not very good. High level classes like AP Calculus and Statistics are focused on an overarching theme. For building connections it’s easy to set a few hours to study for example applications of algebra in geometry.

For integrated math there’s no opportunity to accelerate, which dissuades top students from following that route.

In which school district?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Integrated math is taught poorly and doesn’t go in depth. Most district that try it switch back to Algebra and Geometry.

But the question is, why is it taught poorly?

Because there’s not enough time to go in depth, so the teacher does a quick review of a small number of topics each year.

As mentioned in the thread, other integrated math classes like IB are not very good. High level classes like AP Calculus and Statistics are focused on an overarching theme. For building connections it’s easy to set a few hours to study for example applications of algebra in geometry.

For integrated math there’s no opportunity to accelerate, which dissuades top students from following that route.

Anonymous wrote:All of the assessments are word problems which depend on reading ability. None of them are straight computation. My math tests used to be straight computation problems. If they are all word problems, you aren't really testing one's math ability.

Every single assessment for integrated math is a world problem?

GTFO

All of the assessments are word problems which depend on reading ability. None of them are straight computation. My math tests used to be straight computation problems. If they are all word problems, you aren't really testing one's math ability.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Integrated math is taught poorly and doesn’t go in depth. Most district that try it switch back to Algebra and Geometry.

But the question is, why is it taught poorly?

Actually the question is: why does the PP believe that it's taught poorly or that "most districts" are switching back?

Any facts to back those statements up?

Anonymous wrote:Integrated math is taught poorly and doesn’t go in depth. Most district that try it switch back to Algebra and Geometry.

But the question is, why is it taught poorly?

Integrated math is taught poorly and doesn’t go in depth. Most district that try it switch back to Algebra and Geometry.

Anonymous wrote:OP agree most counties start integrating math concepts in elementary school and produce students who perform much better in math. Unfortunately, the US education is wed to teaching what I refer to as chapter book math (Algebra 1, Geometry, Algebra 2, Trig, Calculus) because “education professionals” don’t feel kids are ready for abstract thought until middle school.

Algebraic concepts can and should begin in preschool, geometric concepts as well. There is absolutely no reason why gifted kids should not be able to handle Calculus by MS.

Unfortunately, those who administer education in this country are quite frankly not the best and brightest.

These topics are integrated early. Even in K, common core has them decomposing numbers (algebra), identifying all the 3D shapes - cones, cylinders, rectangular prisms, cubes, etc. (geometry). Most kids can't meet the standards, though. In our state, 25% of kids test at proficient or above. So something else is going on with our math results.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But why is calculus considered the most advanced topic? Why isn’t there, for example, AP algebra?

Linear Algebra would like a word...

Yup, schools have Linear Algebra as an offering.

The AP Pre-Calculus class is a joke, there is no need for AP Pre-Calculus, it is not something that Colleges are going to take seriously. Algebra is a foundational class. Algebra builds to Algebra 2 and then classes like Linear Algebra and Matrix Algebra, those are the college level classes. Math builds on itself and there are many branches. Algebra is foundational for all other math, you can take DE Linera Algebra if you are looking for more advanced math but there is not going to be AP Algebra.

ES math in FCPS is integrated, the kids are introduced to traditional math concepts (addition, subtraction, multiplication, divisions, fractions, and all of that) but also the basics of algebra and geometry. Kids who are able to excel in ES math are moved into the Advanced Math curriculum, where they learn 1 1/2 grades worth of math starting in 3rd grade. By the time they are 6th grade they are a year ahead and take Math 7, as it is taught in MS. The kids who excel there will take Algebra 1 H in 7th grade while others will take Math 7H, essentially pre-algebra, in 7th grade.

Integrated math is taught at the IB schools and, quite frankly, it looks awful. Most of the kids will have had Algebra 1 by 8th grade, so they take Geometry and Algebra II. Then they will take IB Math SL or HL as Juniors and Seniors. I have looked at the syllabus and it does not cover the material that a kid who is strong in math and enjoys math needs to be challenged. Many schools that teach AP classes have paths for statistics and analysis as well as calculus paths that can meet the needs of kids who are not interested in calculus.

Anonymous wrote:But why is calculus considered the most advanced topic? Why isn’t there, for example, AP algebra?

Linear Algebra would like a word...

Anonymous wrote:I'd rather stick with one type of math for the entire year. It would be confusing for me to not build on what I was learning and instead, switch to something entirely different. Math is hard enough for me.

+1. Math wasn't hard for me, but integrated math always sounded miserable.