Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If kids don't get chosen for compacted 4/5 math, does that mean they will be in on grade level math for the rest of their years in MCPS? Is there really no other opportunity for math acceleration after the end of third grade?

I think that's right. If your child does 4th grade math in 4th grade, he would move on to 5th grade math in 5th. But the 4/5 kids would have already completed most/all of 5th grade math in the 4/5 class in 4th grade, so that accelerated track would be moving to math 6 after that and your child wouldn't qualify for that (simply b/c he wasn't ready for acceleration at the one point of entry). This is one of the many, many issues with 2.0. It is so rigid and static it doesn't allow for kids to develop at their own pace and have their needs met accordingly.

My child happens to be in 4/5 math this year, but I have a lot of issues with the rigidity of the new 2.0 math tracks. It seems to me that by grouping kids in 4th grade, MCPS is essentially eliminating future options for acceleration for the kids that weren't ready for acceleration in 4th grade (b/c the classes track from that point). I'm sure they won't say that this is the case, but it must be. What if your current 4th grader begins to click with math next year? There won't be an accelerated option for that child b/c the kids that were ready for acceleration in 4th grade will be tracked to the higher classes.

This is where we're at. The test last year to pick this year's 4/5 had 5 different categories that students were tested on: http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/math/compacted/. One of the sections is all about explaining your work. So if you have a kid who does well in math they won't qualify if they can't explain their work. So it leaves the kids who do catch on and understand math innately but can't explain their work with no true path for acceleration. This is what has happened to my 4th grader (Winter Map-M was a 241) but didn't make the cut. This is where it really matters who your child's teacher is. Fortunately, my son has a teacher that makes the extra effort and sends home challenge problems him. Nothing is ideal. I'm not saying there shouldn't be a cut off, there needs to be parameters and criteria. But like the above poster says, what about kids that it clicks for after the test? Unfortunately from what I've heard from current 5th grade parents is that paths for acceleration will continue to be limited at the middle school level as 2.0 takes hold at the upper grades.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schools keeping it very quiet but it was implemented across county this year for 4th graders. Some schools have a class full of kids, some school have none. Many schools have a few students and they go to a Middle School in their cluster with other kids to fomr a class. This is a bummer because the 4th graders start school at MS bell times. Across the county 12% of 4th graders are in compacted Math but HGC have over 80%, so traditional schools are well below this. As I mentioned, some schools did not have anyone qualify after taking the county-wide assessment in 3rd grade.

Where did you get these numbers from?

Called the county administrative offices to get the %. The information about schools have a full class or going to middle school is from moms of kids in the class at different schools, including myself. For instance, Laytonsville and Carderock have full classes. Sherwood cluster ES go to Farquhar MS.

Anonymous wrote:My DS is in compacted Math and goes early to MS, which is inconvenient but I really do not understand the exclusivity. He has 10 other kids in his class. The children at his home ES are in a class of 31 with much more variation in ability. I am just saying that seems illogical to me even if it does benefit my DS. The Compacted Math teacher is also very good and incorporates a lot of challenging work even when outside of 2.0. My DS seems engaged and interested, so I am very happy about the class even if he gets a little less sleep.

This will happen in middle school too. My daughter came from her home school/not HGC. She was in the highest level math offered at our home school. In middle school, she started IM in 6th, Algebra in 7th and Geometry in 8th. Her friends were math kids from HGC and they started Algebra in 6th and are now going to the high school for Algebra 2 in 8th grade. Don't know if this will be in the case in post-2.0 world.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So do these students just go to the middle school for part of the day? Do they take the rest of their classes at their home school? Are HGC and Magnets the same thing (highly gifted children?) Is the percentage at 80% at the magnets because these are already the top performing students and the other 12% are the ones in limbo at their home schools? Is it always better to apply to a magnet then?

Math is not part of the HGC curriculum. At my child's HGC, all but two of the children in his class are in compacted math. They go to a separate teacher for math. There are about 5 children from the non-HGC classes at the school who are also in their math class. These students are receiving the same exact compacted 4/5 curriculum for math that 4th grade students (who qualify) receive throughout the county. If my child had chosen not to go to an HGC, he would be in a pull out in his home school. The pull out would teach 4/5 math. So math is not a reason to go to an HGC.

Everyone in my son's HGC is in compacted math. It is taught by his main teacher. It is taught during the regular math slot. We have been pleased.

Math is a reason to go to the HGC if you are in the Cabin John cluster because you do not have to get up early to get compacted math. It is not a reason in the Hoover cluster where I think compacted is taught during the regular school day -- someone correct me if I am wrong.

My DS also goes to middle school in the morning. When Math 4 is taught in his class he usually helps another teacher with administrative tasks or he can sit in the class but do his homework. He does not particpate in the Math 4 class ever.

Anonymous wrote:My daughter is one of 6 from her Elementary school that has to go to a middle school for her compacted math class. Instead of getting out the door for a 9.15 am start to the day, we now have to haul her up at 7 am and be out the door by 7.30 am to get her to the middle school for a 7.55 am class. Total PITA. And this is for TWO YEARS. We only found out about it late August and not being familiar with the US public school system, I did not ask many questions and just accepted the place.

This process seems very uneven, compared to our compacted 4/5 situation. My DC doesn't go to a Middle school for math 4/5, but is taken out of his language immersion class (which does 4th grade math at the time) to attend the 4/5 math class with another teacher.

Does this mean your daughter doesn't lose any normal 4th grade class time, if her math class takes place before the start of the elementary school? Does she still sit through the regular 4th grade math class?

Our DC loses out on the language aspect of the immersion program by not being in class while the rest of the students are being taught 4th grade math in the language. The math 4/5 kids end up being less exposed to the language, most likely making it more difficult for them to keep up with language immersion once they get to middle school.

Anonymous wrote:If kids don't get chosen for compacted 4/5 math, does that mean they will be in on grade level math for the rest of their years in MCPS? Is there really no other opportunity for math acceleration after the end of third grade?

I think that's right. If your child does 4th grade math in 4th grade, he would move on to 5th grade math in 5th. But the 4/5 kids would have already completed most/all of 5th grade math in the 4/5 class in 4th grade, so that accelerated track would be moving to math 6 after that and your child wouldn't qualify for that (simply b/c he wasn't ready for acceleration at the one point of entry). This is one of the many, many issues with 2.0. It is so rigid and static it doesn't allow for kids to develop at their own pace and have their needs met accordingly.

My child happens to be in 4/5 math this year, but I have a lot of issues with the rigidity of the new 2.0 math tracks. It seems to me that by grouping kids in 4th grade, MCPS is essentially eliminating future options for acceleration for the kids that weren't ready for acceleration in 4th grade (b/c the classes track from that point). I'm sure they won't say that this is the case, but it must be. What if your current 4th grader begins to click with math next year? There won't be an accelerated option for that child b/c the kids that were ready for acceleration in 4th grade will be tracked to the higher classes.

If kids don't get chosen for compacted 4/5 math, does that mean they will be in on grade level math for the rest of their years in MCPS? Is there really no other opportunity for math acceleration after the end of third grade?

I think that the 2.0 math curriculum is better than the old curriculum -- not necessarily more challenging, but better.

My Math Pathways kid did fine in K. In first grade, they needed to know math facts, but practicing math facts was the parents' responsibility. In second grade, half the class got semi-accelerated, which means that they zipped through material they really needed to spend more time on. In third grade, half the class did fourth grade math, which means they never got third grade math. In fourth grade, my kid got put in sixth/seventh grade math, which means they never got fifth grade math. I spent the summers filling in holes and having the kid do drills.

My 2.0 kid is spending a lot more time doing on the same material. Yes, there's no acceleration until Math 4/5, and sometimes the kid complains. (Which is why we supplement at home.) But when this kid gets to Algebra I in seventh or eighth grade, this kid's understanding of basic math is going to be solid.

This is not as specific as you might like but my DD pre 2.0 would get a drawing of a shaded area that was basically the space between the rectangle and the circle and was asked for the area. My DS in 2.0 was given a word problem about a plot if land and that all the land with fertile soil was farmed. Then there were specifics about the crop sizes but he had to figure out how much soil was not fertile. So basically he had to understand what the shapes were and that the question being asked was the remainder. It required an extra level of understanding (or at least that is what I thought when I saw the problem.)

For the pp.'s who believe that 2.0 math is more challenging than the old curriculum: can you give me an example? I have an older child who's only had the old curriculum and has gotten an amazing math education. I have a 4th grader who's started with the old curriculum and now has 2.0 (including, yes, the awkwardly rolled-out 3rd grade repeated math year last year).

My older child has learned so much and has a great understanding of concepts as well and the mechanics of math. My younger child gets very simplistic calculations followed by esoteric questions. An example from recent homework: Step 1: What is 1/3 plus 1/3. (Simple, but fine.) Step 2: Why? (Esoteric and are you kidding?). I sent the question to my mathematics phd/nuclear physicist brother who sent me a message back telling me to run away from that math curriculum.

I would like to see the other side of this argument, really I would. However, I simply don't see how asking 4th graders "why" facts are facts leads to any deeper understanding. Seems to me that it simply tries to make objective math into a subjective discussion. I'm not convinced that this actually leads to better understanding in kids this age.

I do see your point. In my son's class they do have math groups - not everyone is working on the same thing.

I agree that 2.0 Math is good and requires more complex thinking. But my beef is with the lack of differentiation in the classes. You are not going to convince me that under 2.0 it still wouldn't be better to split the classes by levels. Sorry but the top 20% are not going to be challenged in a class of up to 33 that also includes the bottom 20%. IMO that pace is just too slow to keep a 9 yo boy engaged. The same class has 6 different reading books to differentiate. How can it be okay for Math when it isn't for reading?

I have a 4th grader taking compacted math. He says he does a lot in school and has one easy worksheet nightly. It moves quickly and he loves it. Regarding 2.0 math (aside from a lousy 3rd grade year when they rolled out 2.0 and had essentially had to repeat 3rd grade math. ) I think it is much better than the old curriculum. I have a 2nd grader who has only done 2.0 math since K and he's doing much harder 'thinking' type work and stuff he has to figure out on his own. Much more sophisticated that the 'advanced' match my 4th grader had k-2.

My DS is in compacted Math and goes early to MS, which is inconvenient but I really do not understand the exclusivity. He has 10 other kids in his class. The children at his home ES are in a class of 31 with much more variation in ability. I am just saying that seems illogical to me even if it does benefit my DS. The Compacted Math teacher is also very good and incorporates a lot of challenging work even when outside of 2.0. My DS seems engaged and interested, so I am very happy about the class even if he gets a little less sleep.