Anonymous wrote:

The student doesn't need a textbook to find out what topics they missed. That's not nitpicking; it's a fact.

Now, you may think it's more effective for your child to go over pp. 120-131 in a textbook than to look up the topics on line. But that's a different question.

If there were accessible on-line materials that show concrete examples of the problems, a clear explanation, and a range of problems reflecting the levels of complexity and rigor expected then yes. This does not exist. 2.0 is boondoggle of vague non-sense eduspeak and language rather than math based exercises that belongs no where near a math curriculum.

The student doesn't need a textbook to find out what topics they missed. That's not nitpicking; it's a fact.

Now, you may think it's more effective for your child to go over pp. 120-131 in a textbook than to look up the topics on line. But that's a different question.

Anonymous wrote:How about instead of word smithing me PP you recognize reality. child has flu misses school. Comes back has 7 classes they need work from for 3 days. the student misses the lectures. They have no way of making sure they receive all the content that was covered in class and algebra builds so they need to learn the material. I know it would have been great for my DC to read the material and complete the assignments by following an actual book. Not try to guess and hope a different online source covers the relevant material.

This is what I dislike about DCURB parents, someone nitpicks a line out of context.

Anonymous wrote:Here is one part of the solution - give all students an Algebra textbook. A kid misses a day of school or doesn't understand the class lecture. The student can go back and review the textbook. Today, with no book a student misses class and they have no way to study the content and Algebra builds so a good foundation is important.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have 2 children taking Geometry at 2 different schools. I noticed real quick that instruction is NOT the same across the county. One school closely used the new 2.0 worksheets and instructional material as well as taught the material in the intended order. The other school relied on the old text book, taught units out of order, and did not cover all the material that was on the exam. The student who had the 2.0 materials was better prepared for the county exam and received an A. My other child had huge gaps in learning and the D exam grade was a reflection of this problem. I discussed this issue with the school administration just to get BS answers and a lack of follow through to fix the problem. They said each school has discretion as to the materials they use and how they implement the curriculum.

The testing data should be broken out school by school. Problem teachers and administrators should be weeded out and the successes should be replicated. Kids cannot be successful on a county wide exam if they do not have instruction in the material that is on the test.

That is just wrong! I think you should email the BOE about this. It's one thing to allow teachers discretion regarding teaching material, but using an old textbook for a curriculum that has been revamped is just lazy, or maybe the teacher is not so great at math and doesn't understand the new curriculum, let alone teach it.

I think eventually, the testing data does come out school by school. I remember when this fiasco happened last year, the numbers by HS/MS were published eventually.

You really need to bring this up with the BOE, for everyone's sake.

I would gladly take it up with the BOE if there was a channel to do so. This fall I was redirected by the BOE to discuss the issue with the MCPS Office of School Performance, which I did. My complaints fell on deaf ears.

Anonymous wrote:

I would gladly take it up with the BOE if there was a channel to do so. This fall I was redirected by the BOE to discuss the issue with the MCPS Office of School Performance, which I did. My complaints fell on deaf ears.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have 2 children taking Geometry at 2 different schools. I noticed real quick that instruction is NOT the same across the county. One school closely used the new 2.0 worksheets and instructional material as well as taught the material in the intended order. The other school relied on the old text book, taught units out of order, and did not cover all the material that was on the exam. The student who had the 2.0 materials was better prepared for the county exam and received an A. My other child had huge gaps in learning and the D exam grade was a reflection of this problem. I discussed this issue with the school administration just to get BS answers and a lack of follow through to fix the problem. They said each school has discretion as to the materials they use and how they implement the curriculum.

The testing data should be broken out school by school. Problem teachers and administrators should be weeded out and the successes should be replicated. Kids cannot be successful on a county wide exam if they do not have instruction in the material that is on the test.

That is just wrong! I think you should email the BOE about this. It's one thing to allow teachers discretion regarding teaching material, but using an old textbook for a curriculum that has been revamped is just lazy, or maybe the teacher is not so great at math and doesn't understand the new curriculum, let alone teach it.

I think eventually, the testing data does come out school by school. I remember when this fiasco happened last year, the numbers by HS/MS were published eventually.

You really need to bring this up with the BOE, for everyone's sake.

Anonymous wrote:I have 2 children taking Geometry at 2 different schools. I noticed real quick that instruction is NOT the same across the county. One school closely used the new 2.0 worksheets and instructional material as well as taught the material in the intended order. The other school relied on the old text book, taught units out of order, and did not cover all the material that was on the exam. The student who had the 2.0 materials was better prepared for the county exam and received an A. My other child had huge gaps in learning and the D exam grade was a reflection of this problem. I discussed this issue with the school administration just to get BS answers and a lack of follow through to fix the problem. They said each school has discretion as to the materials they use and how they implement the curriculum.

The testing data should be broken out school by school. Problem teachers and administrators should be weeded out and the successes should be replicated. Kids cannot be successful on a county wide exam if they do not have instruction in the material that is on the test.

Anonymous wrote:

By the way, most kids are taking Algebra I in either 7th or 8th grade. The students taking it in 9th grade tend to be performing below grade level or have learning issues which may explain why their grades on the exam are often lower.

The MCPS intent though is to band everyone together. The kids who are failing Algebra 1 in high school would be taking it in 8th grade per 2.0. Now, the kids that would have taken it in 6th or 7th and are great in math would be slowed down and they would also be in the same Algebra in 8th. Their high scores would balance out the increase in failing scores for students who perform lower. This doesn't help either set of students but this is MCPS. Its all about serving and propping up MCPS not educating students so if the failing scores can just be hidden, win, win!

By the way, most kids are taking Algebra I in either 7th or 8th grade. The students taking it in 9th grade tend to be performing below grade level or have learning issues which may explain why their grades on the exam are often lower.