Anonymous wrote:This is now the trend. If you look at San Francisco Unified there is no other option but to take Algebra in 9th grade. If you want your child to be challenged and pass out of Algebra 1 they have to take a University of California approved algebra class and take a test offered by the school district. So if your child takes AOPS Algebra it won't count because it isn't an A-G approved provider. Then you are only advanced 1 year.

More and more districts are not allowing math acceleration.

But how does this improve equity? Bright kids who are not wealthy enough to escape the public school system are stuck with Algebra I in 9th. People who are wealthy will place their kids in private schools, where their kids will get Algebra in 7th or 8th. Wouldn't this just increase the divide between the haves and the have-nots?

This is now the trend. If you look at San Francisco Unified there is no other option but to take Algebra in 9th grade. If you want your child to be challenged and pass out of Algebra 1 they have to take a University of California approved algebra class and take a test offered by the school district. So if your child takes AOPS Algebra it won't count because it isn't an A-G approved provider. Then you are only advanced 1 year.

More and more districts are not allowing math acceleration.

Anonymous wrote:"I'm not even sure it always makes sense at K-2. My AAP kid was so bored in 2nd grade she was miserable. Only reason she wasn't bored in 1st was that her teacher was abnormally amazing at in-class differentiation."

+1
Math in K-2 was AWFUL except for where the teacher had enough time to make it a priority to differentiate for the advanced end. And "go do X on the computer" since you're done is not differentiating...

I think kids should wait until at least 3rd grade to do calculus...

"I'm not even sure it always makes sense at K-2. My AAP kid was so bored in 2nd grade she was miserable. Only reason she wasn't bored in 1st was that her teacher was abnormally amazing at in-class differentiation."

+1
Math in K-2 was AWFUL except for where the teacher had enough time to make it a priority to differentiate for the advanced end. And "go do X on the computer" since you're done is not differentiating...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This Freakonomics episode from a few years ago seems to be suggesting the same changes VA is pursuing. https://freakonomics.com/podcast/math-curriculum/

In theory, I like the idea of more data analysis, statistics being introduced but totally disagree with "detracking." All students are helped by having instruction at their pace.

If you have small classes, starting in lower ES you can “track” in class. I’m theory you’ll have less of a gap, if you start early.

Arlington just switches classes. They still have tracking without an AAP center. That's how smaller school districts do it. They don't expect the teacher to teach multiple levels.

Yup. They “cluster” gifted kids in all ES classes, but then switch teachers for the core subjects, so the kids identified as gifted in math, or any subject, get completely different instruction. It’s the only way you can actually meet the needs of kids who are still struggling with double digit subtraction in 5th grade and those doing algebra with ease. Detracking at K-2 makes sense. Beyond that, the skills become so divergent it’s impossible for one teacher to meet the needs of 20-30 kids within one classroom.

I'm not even sure it always makes sense at K-2. My AAP kid was so bored in 2nd grade she was miserable. Only reason she wasn't bored in 1st was that her teacher was abnormally amazing at in-class differentiation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This Freakonomics episode from a few years ago seems to be suggesting the same changes VA is pursuing. https://freakonomics.com/podcast/math-curriculum/

In theory, I like the idea of more data analysis, statistics being introduced but totally disagree with "detracking." All students are helped by having instruction at their pace.

If you have small classes, starting in lower ES you can “track” in class. I’m theory you’ll have less of a gap, if you start early.

Arlington just switches classes. They still have tracking without an AAP center. That's how smaller school districts do it. They don't expect the teacher to teach multiple levels.

Yup. They “cluster” gifted kids in all ES classes, but then switch teachers for the core subjects, so the kids identified as gifted in math, or any subject, get completely different instruction. It’s the only way you can actually meet the needs of kids who are still struggling with double digit subtraction in 5th grade and those doing algebra with ease. Detracking at K-2 makes sense. Beyond that, the skills become so divergent it’s impossible for one teacher to meet the needs of 20-30 kids within one classroom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Algebra really doesn’t need to be a standalone class. I’m not sure that people really understand the proposal.

It does if you're moving into or out of VA. If you're a 9th grader who has had some amount of Algebra and Geometry content delivered piecemeal, and then you move somewhere with separate Algebra, Geometry, Algebra II, classes, what would you take? You'd either be repeating a lot of material or you'd be skipping a lot.

Yes people understand the proposal. One math class for all until grades 11 and 12. Differentiation and students helping lower ability students in class. That leaves 2 years in HS for alg, geom, trig, pre calc, calc. Everyone gets a trophy and chances for good grades in math. More people think they are qualified to apply for or have the ability to do stem or finance or accounting careers so it's on to college! If the demographics don't make the cut just remove the discipline or change the program! Nasty implications for engineering [ imagine structural or mechanical] and how about the lack of objective measurement and surgery? This sort of thinking is now in the military for flying manned and unmanned planes. Not enough people of certain ethnicities are pilots . Now the military is certainly open about processes and application for specialties. I can see recruiting enhancements at certain colleges but NOT mentorship and coddling once in the air force.

This sort of everyone gets a trophy is ludicrous. Is it a spin off of the TJ issues?

Not exactly, but driven by the same very activist VDOE. The VDOE really needs some serious turnover so that it's focused on issues that really matter (getting kids in school without hours waivers, reading curriculums that follow the science of reading instead of f-ing Lucy Calkins, holding districts accountable for FAPE, etc.) and not these talking-points-for-equity issues that actually don't change lives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Algebra really doesn’t need to be a standalone class. I’m not sure that people really understand the proposal.

It does if you're moving into or out of VA. If you're a 9th grader who has had some amount of Algebra and Geometry content delivered piecemeal, and then you move somewhere with separate Algebra, Geometry, Algebra II, classes, what would you take? You'd either be repeating a lot of material or you'd be skipping a lot.

Yes people understand the proposal. One math class for all until grades 11 and 12. Differentiation and students helping lower ability students in class. That leaves 2 years in HS for alg, geom, trig, pre calc, calc. Everyone gets a trophy and chances for good grades in math. More people think they are qualified to apply for or have the ability to do stem or finance or accounting careers so it's on to college! If the demographics don't make the cut just remove the discipline or change the program! Nasty implications for engineering [ imagine structural or mechanical] and how about the lack of objective measurement and surgery? This sort of thinking is now in the military for flying manned and unmanned planes. Not enough people of certain ethnicities are pilots . Now the military is certainly open about processes and application for specialties. I can see recruiting enhancements at certain colleges but NOT mentorship and coddling once in the air force.

This sort of everyone gets a trophy is ludicrous. Is it a spin off of the TJ issues?

People need to reach out to their Delegates and candidates for those seats this year and let them know that they don't approve of this plan. It has not been submitted as a way forward, although that is on their timeline. Right now it is still a concept, it is easier to effect change in this monstrosity now then it will be in 2-3 years.

Anonymous wrote:Math teacher here. How the heck am I supposed to teach pre-calc and remedial algebra in the same classroom!

Say it louder for the people in the back, including those who work for VDOE.

The more math teachers who ask the hard questions, the more holes in the plan get exposed.

Anonymous wrote:Math teacher here. How the heck am I supposed to teach pre-calc and remedial algebra in the same classroom!

According to VDOE, the remedial algebra students learn from the pre-calc kids via osmosis.

Math teacher here. How the heck am I supposed to teach pre-calc and remedial algebra in the same classroom!

Anonymous wrote:
I’m seeing algebra in middle school per the chart not 9th? Am I looking at the wrong information?

Maybe. If you are seeing Algebra in 8th grade that is part of the current pathways.
The new plan is to have only one pathway- everyone takes the same class.
Algebra is listed as part of the topics covered in classes in 7th and 8th grade in the proposal.

Anonymous wrote:Just listened to the freakonomics episode. It’s persuasive. Would think it even belongs in the resources section for VMPI.

But - why can’t we:
- teach differently to cover fewer things and handle these data concepts much better
- leave these new 11th and 12th grade options
- yet maintain ability grouping and pacing so that quicker kids are not hostage to the pace the entire grade can learn at.

Yes, I agree with this! I think there’s good data to support this (ex: the book The STEM Delusion)

Just listened to the freakonomics episode. It’s persuasive. Would think it even belongs in the resources section for VMPI.

But - why can’t we:
- teach differently to cover fewer things and handle these data concepts much better
- leave these new 11th and 12th grade options
- yet maintain ability grouping and pacing so that quicker kids are not hostage to the pace the entire grade can learn at.