Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why everyone wants harder math younger. Seriously (not being snarky), why?

- All ES kids whose academic trajectories are stable are bored in school sometimes. Some of them are bored most of the time.

- Putting younger kids directly into older kids' classes is a recipe for serious bullying. I have experienced this firsthand. No kid 'needs' more math badly enough to suffer for it.

- You probably can't get more than 1-2 years of post-BC calc math in no matter how you choreograph it anyway. So there's not going to be some massive college advantage because there are lots of kids in the same situation anyway.

- The number of kids who are genuinely curious and creative about mathematics is not the same as the number who can score reasonably high on tests.

- Acceleration and mastery are two different things. Going too fast at the lower levels when things seem easier can cause a lot of problems later. Test scores can't insulate against that.

- Wanting the best for your kid can easily make us parents assume that we have to negotiate and fight for things. Sometimes an equally productive course of action is to do what is in front of you thoroughly and well.

Class insecurity

Same here. My DS has a 3rd grader in his math 4/5 class...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is compacted math ever an option to a highly gifted 3rd grader (instead of having to wait until 4th)?

Yes it is. My DC told me about 2 student in his school now that are in 3rd grade who take compact math with the 4th graders.

Anonymous wrote:Is compacted math ever an option to a highly gifted 3rd grader (instead of having to wait until 4th)?

Yes it is. My DC told me about 2 student in his school now that are in 3rd grade who take compact math with the 4th graders.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why everyone wants harder math younger. Seriously (not being snarky), why?

- All ES kids whose academic trajectories are stable are bored in school sometimes. Some of them are bored most of the time.

- Putting younger kids directly into older kids' classes is a recipe for serious bullying. I have experienced this firsthand. No kid 'needs' more math badly enough to suffer for it.

- You probably can't get more than 1-2 years of post-BC calc math in no matter how you choreograph it anyway. So there's not going to be some massive college advantage because there are lots of kids in the same situation anyway.

- The number of kids who are genuinely curious and creative about mathematics is not the same as the number who can score reasonably high on tests.

- Acceleration and mastery are two different things. Going too fast at the lower levels when things seem easier can cause a lot of problems later. Test scores can't insulate against that.

- Wanting the best for your kid can easily make us parents assume that we have to negotiate and fight for things. Sometimes an equally productive course of action is to do what is in front of you thoroughly and well.

- We should have school experiences that don't bore them/turn them off from education, for obvious reasons (and Math, in particular, given both the relative societal need and the high correlation with improved career/life outcomes).

- Though equally an anecdote, my DC's experience being mixed with older children did not reault in bullying. I make no judgement about increased likelihood of such, but while I agree that classrooms should be safe spaces, I know that bullying can occur in same-age situations, and experienced far more of that, myself.

- Though I think that the focus should be on meeting students where they are & providing challenge, I would argue that there is a relative disadvantage in college admissions if acceleration is not afforded to a student at one school where a similar student would be afforded it at another. If all other application elements grade out as equal, the admissions office is more likely to offer a spot to the student having accessed a higher level of Math. Enough offerings above and complementary to AP Calculus BC should be made available in a standardized manner across the county to fill the 2 then-open years that current 4th-grade students on the standard high acceleration path (finishing PreAlgebra in 6th) would see with the new 2-year Integrated Math & following pathways they will hit afterwards; moreover, MCPS stakeholdersshould push MSDE to exempt those having completed Calculus from the one-Math-class-in-each-year-of-HS graduation requirement.

- I would agree with the point differentiating ability/interest from achievement represented by exposure-based test scores. MCPS should reconstruct/refine identification paradigms better to meet the needs associated with the former, but also should not dismiss out of hand the need associated with the latter, provided interest holds, especially in elementary.

- Employment of adequate rigor and enrichment may better ensure mastery. Conversations with families should include consideration for slowing down if a teacher notes difficulty achieving mastery with acceleration. These do not mean that acceleration, as offered, should stop.

- The admonition to encourage a student to do a good job with that which is offered to them does not preclude offering acceleration, especially when such offerings are long-established in the system. If the system makes public detailed/complete identification/selection criteria, employs reasonable associated heuristics and provides justification for these, along with ensuring access/capacity across the system for all who might be identified, families would not feel nearly as much need to negotiate/fight.

I think MCPS has been doing a better job with all of that in the past few years, but that there still is a ways to go, especially regarding truly open communications, adequate capacities and fidelity across the system in associated practice.

This part is not true. Colleges look at what classes are offered at a given school. You might actually hurt your child's college chances by putting them on a math path they cannot handle in HS.

I agree with original person that does not understand why everyone wants harder math younger. I pulled my kid back in MS even though they are quite good at math. Their classmate are currently struggling with Calc AB in 11th grade and mine will roll into Calc BC in 12th with a good foundation. Won't be able to find it AP stats but will actually end up with a higher math class. There should be no rush to get to Calculus so early.If a kid is that good at math then speed them up in HS either at a magnet or by talking MC classes.

This post picks out of a list of refutations that one conjecture, disagreeing with it by way of misinterpretation -- a misinterpretation that has been put forth on other threads and corrected, only to pop up again when the conjecture is reiterated. It may be, of course, that the conjecture is being misinterpreted by multiple posters.

The conjecture clearly states, right after the part bolded by the respondent, that it applies where all other things are equal, that is, where the only real differentiator is the level of Math taken. What seems to be assumed by the respondent ("Colleges look at what classes are offered at a given school.") is that college admissions offices would not have that differentiating data or would not consider it. That, itself, is not true across colleges, even if a MD state school is asked only to consider whether a student took the most rigorous course path offered.

The poster then posits something completely different from the clearly stated assumption of the conjecture they claim not to be true -- that the student accessing the higher level of Math struggles with it (i.e., not all other things being equal). The conclusion of falsehood simply does not follow.

The heart of that issue is the case when the system does not provide equal access to programming for similar students.

With respect to the rest of the post, I would not argue against a family (or student) deciding not to accelerate, especially if the student is enjoying the material presented without acceleration. Indeed there can be a challenge in future grades, and MCPS has provided both "off ramps" in MS and alternative Math courses to take if completing Calculus with time to go before graduation. Make no mistake -- getting through Calc BC in high school is great!

But, again, I don't see where the implied conclusion comes from that and the anecdote of a student struggling in AB that acceleration should not be offered across the system to any student well identified as having need as defined by associated ability and interest. For all of the reasons given in the refutation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why everyone wants harder math younger. Seriously (not being snarky), why?

- All ES kids whose academic trajectories are stable are bored in school sometimes. Some of them are bored most of the time.

- Putting younger kids directly into older kids' classes is a recipe for serious bullying. I have experienced this firsthand. No kid 'needs' more math badly enough to suffer for it.

- You probably can't get more than 1-2 years of post-BC calc math in no matter how you choreograph it anyway. So there's not going to be some massive college advantage because there are lots of kids in the same situation anyway.

- The number of kids who are genuinely curious and creative about mathematics is not the same as the number who can score reasonably high on tests.

- Acceleration and mastery are two different things. Going too fast at the lower levels when things seem easier can cause a lot of problems later. Test scores can't insulate against that.

- Wanting the best for your kid can easily make us parents assume that we have to negotiate and fight for things. Sometimes an equally productive course of action is to do what is in front of you thoroughly and well.

- We should have school experiences that don't bore them/turn them off from education, for obvious reasons (and Math, in particular, given both the relative societal need and the high correlation with improved career/life outcomes).

- Though equally an anecdote, my DC's experience being mixed with older children did not reault in bullying. I make no judgement about increased likelihood of such, but while I agree that classrooms should be safe spaces, I know that bullying can occur in same-age situations, and experienced far more of that, myself.

- Though I think that the focus should be on meeting students where they are & providing challenge, I would argue that there is a relative disadvantage in college admissions if acceleration is not afforded to a student at one school where a similar student would be afforded it at another. If all other application elements grade out as equal, the admissions office is more likely to offer a spot to the student having accessed a higher level of Math. Enough offerings above and complementary to AP Calculus BC should be made available in a standardized manner across the county to fill the 2 then-open years that current 4th-grade students on the standard high acceleration path (finishing PreAlgebra in 6th) would see with the new 2-year Integrated Math & following pathways they will hit afterwards; moreover, MCPS stakeholdersshould push MSDE to exempt those having completed Calculus from the one-Math-class-in-each-year-of-HS graduation requirement.

- I would agree with the point differentiating ability/interest from achievement represented by exposure-based test scores. MCPS should reconstruct/refine identification paradigms better to meet the needs associated with the former, but also should not dismiss out of hand the need associated with the latter, provided interest holds, especially in elementary.

- Employment of adequate rigor and enrichment may better ensure mastery. Conversations with families should include consideration for slowing down if a teacher notes difficulty achieving mastery with acceleration. These do not mean that acceleration, as offered, should stop.

- The admonition to encourage a student to do a good job with that which is offered to them does not preclude offering acceleration, especially when such offerings are long-established in the system. If the system makes public detailed/complete identification/selection criteria, employs reasonable associated heuristics and provides justification for these, along with ensuring access/capacity across the system for all who might be identified, families would not feel nearly as much need to negotiate/fight.

I think MCPS has been doing a better job with all of that in the past few years, but that there still is a ways to go, especially regarding truly open communications, adequate capacities and fidelity across the system in associated practice.

This part is not true. Colleges look at what classes are offered at a given school. You might actually hurt your child's college chances by putting them on a math path they cannot handle in HS.

I agree with original person that does not understand why everyone wants harder math younger. I pulled my kid back in MS even though they are quite good at math. Their classmate are currently struggling with Calc AB in 11th grade and mine will roll into Calc BC in 12th with a good foundation. Won't be able to find it AP stats but will actually end up with a higher math class. There should be no rush to get to Calculus so early.If a kid is that good at math then speed them up in HS either at a magnet or by talking MC classes.

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why everyone wants harder math younger. Seriously (not being snarky), why?

- All ES kids whose academic trajectories are stable are bored in school sometimes. Some of them are bored most of the time.

- Putting younger kids directly into older kids' classes is a recipe for serious bullying. I have experienced this firsthand. No kid 'needs' more math badly enough to suffer for it.

- You probably can't get more than 1-2 years of post-BC calc math in no matter how you choreograph it anyway. So there's not going to be some massive college advantage because there are lots of kids in the same situation anyway.

- The number of kids who are genuinely curious and creative about mathematics is not the same as the number who can score reasonably high on tests.

- Acceleration and mastery are two different things. Going too fast at the lower levels when things seem easier can cause a lot of problems later. Test scores can't insulate against that.

- Wanting the best for your kid can easily make us parents assume that we have to negotiate and fight for things. Sometimes an equally productive course of action is to do what is in front of you thoroughly and well.

- We should have school experiences that don't bore them/turn them off from education, for obvious reasons (and Math, in particular, given both the relative societal need and the high correlation with improved career/life outcomes).

- Though equally an anecdote, my DC's experience being mixed with older children did not reault in bullying. I make no judgement about increased likelihood of such, but while I agree that classrooms should be safe spaces, I know that bullying can occur in same-age situations, and experienced far more of that, myself.

- Though I think that the focus should be on meeting students where they are & providing challenge, I would argue that there is a relative disadvantage in college admissions if acceleration is not afforded to a student at one school where a similar student would be afforded it at another. If all other application elements grade out as equal, the admissions office is more likely to offer a spot to the student having accessed a higher level of Math. Enough offerings above and complementary to AP Calculus BC should be made available in a standardized manner across the county to fill the 2 then-open years that current 4th-grade students on the standard high acceleration path (finishing PreAlgebra in 6th) would see with the new 2-year Integrated Math & following pathways they will hit afterwards; moreover, MCPS stakeholdersshould push MSDE to exempt those having completed Calculus from the one-Math-class-in-each-year-of-HS graduation requirement.

- I would agree with the point differentiating ability/interest from achievement represented by exposure-based test scores. MCPS should reconstruct/refine identification paradigms better to meet the needs associated with the former, but also should not dismiss out of hand the need associated with the latter, provided interest holds, especially in elementary.

- Employment of adequate rigor and enrichment may better ensure mastery. Conversations with families should include consideration for slowing down if a teacher notes difficulty achieving mastery with acceleration. These do not mean that acceleration, as offered, should stop.

- The admonition to encourage a student to do a good job with that which is offered to them does not preclude offering acceleration, especially when such offerings are long-established in the system. If the system makes public detailed/complete identification/selection criteria, employs reasonable associated heuristics and provides justification for these, along with ensuring access/capacity across the system for all who might be identified, families would not feel nearly as much need to negotiate/fight.

I think MCPS has been doing a better job with all of that in the past few years, but that there still is a ways to go, especially regarding truly open communications, adequate capacities and fidelity across the system in associated practice.

I don't understand why everyone wants harder math younger. Seriously (not being snarky), why?

- All ES kids whose academic trajectories are stable are bored in school sometimes. Some of them are bored most of the time.

- Putting younger kids directly into older kids' classes is a recipe for serious bullying. I have experienced this firsthand. No kid 'needs' more math badly enough to suffer for it.

- You probably can't get more than 1-2 years of post-BC calc math in no matter how you choreograph it anyway. So there's not going to be some massive college advantage because there are lots of kids in the same situation anyway.

- The number of kids who are genuinely curious and creative about mathematics is not the same as the number who can score reasonably high on tests.

- Acceleration and mastery are two different things. Going too fast at the lower levels when things seem easier can cause a lot of problems later. Test scores can't insulate against that.

- Wanting the best for your kid can easily make us parents assume that we have to negotiate and fight for things. Sometimes an equally productive course of action is to do what is in front of you thoroughly and well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is compacted math ever an option to a highly gifted 3rd grader (instead of having to wait until 4th)?

No... Anyway, how "highly gifted"? ES and MAP? MAYBE, but PROBABLY NOT, but it depends

What do you mean ES and MAP?

Consistently 99th%ile on MAPM and 99th%ile on CogAt.

What actual score? There are tons of 99th percentile kids in MCPS and for most of them the standard accelerated path (compacted math in 4th and 5th, algebra 1 in 7th) is fine and appropriate. But maybe your kid is way above the average 99th percentile kid and needs more? What's their score?

So your child either skip pre.cal or cal AB?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(From a student who did Alg 1 in 6th, got 250s in 2nd grade, 270s in 4th grade, and STILL took 5/6 in 5th with all the "normal" kids)

Seriously, when will "Alg 1 in 1st?" be a thing at this rate...

My kid had same scores and took Algebra 1 in 7th. The horrors!!!
News flash... they survived and started college having completed MVC and Linear Algebra in HS.

I'm taking a Geometry class in 7th! Oh, the tyranny!!!!!!!!!!! Never mind that every able kid goes into Functions anyway, so they all equalize. The ABSOLUTE TRAVERSITY of it all!!!!!!

Exactly. My kid ended up in the same math class as those that wasted time getting bussed around n 5th grade and 8th grade. But I didn't get to brag as much though I guess.

People, you really just need to assess your kid and what you or they need and want. Is this a truly gifted kid that exhibits extraordinary math ability (think Terrance Tao), OR is this just a kid who is advance who needs enrichment and maybe a bit of advancement.

MAP score alone should not be the determining factor

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(From a student who did Alg 1 in 6th, got 250s in 2nd grade, 270s in 4th grade, and STILL took 5/6 in 5th with all the "normal" kids)

Seriously, when will "Alg 1 in 1st?" be a thing at this rate...

My kid had same scores and took Algebra 1 in 7th. The horrors!!!
News flash... they survived and started college having completed MVC and Linear Algebra in HS.

I'm taking a Geometry class in 7th! Oh, the tyranny!!!!!!!!!!! Never mind that every able kid goes into Functions anyway, so they all equalize. The ABSOLUTE TRAVERSITY of it all!!!!!!

Exactly. My kid ended up in the same math class as those that wasted time getting bussed around n 5th grade and 8th grade. But I didn't get to brag as much though I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is compacted math ever an option to a highly gifted 3rd grader (instead of having to wait until 4th)?

No... Anyway, how "highly gifted"? ES and MAP? MAYBE, but PROBABLY NOT, but it depends

What do you mean ES and MAP?

Consistently 99th%ile on MAPM and 99th%ile on CogAt.

Anonymous wrote:Is compacted math ever an option to a highly gifted 3rd grader (instead of having to wait until 4th)?

No... Anyway, how "highly gifted"? ES and MAP? MAYBE, but PROBABLY NOT, but it depends

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(From a student who did Alg 1 in 6th, got 250s in 2nd grade, 270s in 4th grade, and STILL took 5/6 in 5th with all the "normal" kids)

Seriously, when will "Alg 1 in 1st?" be a thing at this rate...

My kid had same scores and took Algebra 1 in 7th. The horrors!!!
News flash... they survived and started college having completed MVC and Linear Algebra in HS.

I'm taking a Geometry class in 7th! Oh, the tyranny!!!!!!!!!!! Never mind that every able kid goes into Functions anyway, so they all equalize. The ABSOLUTE TRAVERSITY of it all!!!!!!

Is compacted math ever an option to a highly gifted 3rd grader (instead of having to wait until 4th)?