Detracking was not taken off the table in April 2020 in practice. Lane said districts could offer honors or accelerated VMPI tracks if they so desired. Those have always been local decisions. He knew districts wanted detracked classes themselves. It was an artful dodge equivalent to telling a conference of vegans that they would be welcome to serve beef hot dogs for lunch. It wouldn't happen. Look at LCPS. They have book studies for math teachers on Catalyzing Change to learn the benefits of detracked classes, their math PD is geared toward differentiation which is used in detracked classes and they are scaling back math acceleration.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the proposed new curriculum will be presented to the VA BOE by a direct hire (position is vacant) of a Youngkin appointee.

Youngkin owns it.

Certainly hope so!

As originally crafted, the VMPI was a disaster.

The proponents were reluctantly forced to walk back the very most radical proposals (at least, they said they were walking them back). But even then, it would have drastically curtailed advanced math in VA schools, and watered-down math for all through “blending” concepts.

No, it wouldn't.

But don't let facts get in the way of a good wedge issue.

Whoa! Don’t overwhelm us with info or argument.

This has been hashed and rehashed countless times. No matter how clearly anyone lays out the facts, people will continue to push GOP lies.

Why would I bother putting any effort responding to a bad-faith post?

You are the one who is completely lying. The canard of "teach data analytics" was used to support a complete watering down of the curriculum so that (A) all students had to learn algebra 2 and pre-calc in grade 11 in a superficial way, (B) and post-calculus course pathways were completely out of bounds with no acceleration before then. Anyone who has studies real university-level physical sciences knows that the new pathways were a watering down of the math curriculum. And a lot of those strategies are still on the table unless the education department dem appointees to the committees, senior bureaucracy, governing boards, and field staff are all changed. Plus there was a serious focus on identity politics into the physical sciences as a parallel theme in the effort. None of which is supported by the majority of Virginians. Gaslighting from agenda-driven democratic activists won't change the truth.

Liar.

Detracking was taken off the table in April 2020.

The VMPI initiative is dead. Along with anything related to "equity".

VDOE is forming a new committee right now that will do a superficial update of math curriculum that will go through lengthy & public review/hearings. It is being led by Youngkin's appointed superintendent. It will be 100% product of the Youngkin administration.

If you have any issue with the proposed changes you'll have to bring them up with Youngkin & his administration.


Stop lying.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the proposed new curriculum will be presented to the VA BOE by a direct hire (position is vacant) of a Youngkin appointee.

Youngkin owns it.

Certainly hope so!

As originally crafted, the VMPI was a disaster.

The proponents were reluctantly forced to walk back the very most radical proposals (at least, they said they were walking them back). But even then, it would have drastically curtailed advanced math in VA schools, and watered-down math for all through “blending” concepts.

No, it wouldn't.

But don't let facts get in the way of a good wedge issue.

Whoa! Don’t overwhelm us with info or argument.

This has been hashed and rehashed countless times. No matter how clearly anyone lays out the facts, people will continue to push GOP lies.

Why would I bother putting any effort responding to a bad-faith post?

You are the one who is completely lying. The canard of "teach data analytics" was used to support a complete watering down of the curriculum so that (A) all students had to learn algebra 2 and pre-calc in grade 11 in a superficial way, (B) and post-calculus course pathways were completely out of bounds with no acceleration before then. Anyone who has studies real university-level physical sciences knows that the new pathways were a watering down of the math curriculum. And a lot of those strategies are still on the table unless the education department dem appointees to the committees, senior bureaucracy, governing boards, and field staff are all changed. Plus there was a serious focus on identity politics into the physical sciences as a parallel theme in the effort. None of which is supported by the majority of Virginians. Gaslighting from agenda-driven democratic activists won't change the truth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the proposed new curriculum will be presented to the VA BOE by a direct hire (position is vacant) of a Youngkin appointee.

Youngkin owns it.

Certainly hope so!

As originally crafted, the VMPI was a disaster.

The proponents were reluctantly forced to walk back the very most radical proposals (at least, they said they were walking them back). But even then, it would have drastically curtailed advanced math in VA schools, and watered-down math for all through “blending” concepts.

No, it wouldn't.

But don't let facts get in the way of a good wedge issue.

Whoa! Don’t overwhelm us with info or argument.

This has been hashed and rehashed countless times. No matter how clearly anyone lays out the facts, people will continue to push GOP lies.

Why would I bother putting any effort responding to a bad-faith post?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the proposed new curriculum will be presented to the VA BOE by a direct hire (position is vacant) of a Youngkin appointee.

Youngkin owns it.

Certainly hope so!

As originally crafted, the VMPI was a disaster.

The proponents were reluctantly forced to walk back the very most radical proposals (at least, they said they were walking them back). But even then, it would have drastically curtailed advanced math in VA schools, and watered-down math for all through “blending” concepts.

No, it wouldn't.

But don't let facts get in the way of a good wedge issue.

Whoa! Don’t overwhelm us with info or argument.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the proposed new curriculum will be presented to the VA BOE by a direct hire (position is vacant) of a Youngkin appointee.

Youngkin owns it.

Certainly hope so!

As originally crafted, the VMPI was a disaster.

The proponents were reluctantly forced to walk back the very most radical proposals (at least, they said they were walking them back). But even then, it would have drastically curtailed advanced math in VA schools, and watered-down math for all through “blending” concepts.

No, it wouldn't.

But don't let facts get in the way of a good wedge issue.

Anonymous wrote:And the proposed new curriculum will be presented to the VA BOE by a direct hire (position is vacant) of a Youngkin appointee.

Youngkin owns it.

Certainly hope so!

As originally crafted, the VMPI was a disaster.

The proponents were reluctantly forced to walk back the very most radical proposals (at least, they said they were walking them back). But even then, it would have drastically curtailed advanced math in VA schools, and watered-down math for all through “blending” concepts.

And the proposed new curriculum will be presented to the VA BOE by a direct hire (position is vacant) of a Youngkin appointee.

Youngkin owns it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't Youngkin going to eliminate this program?

VMPI was cancelled.

VA still legally needs to update the math curriculum (every 7 years).

- and it is likely the VA-DOE leaders will try to incorporate as much of VMPI into the math curriculum update as they can get away with.

Only the head of VA-DOE was replaced by a Youngkin appointee. The rest of the department are dem holdovers, who fully backed VMPI.

Well it’s a public process so you’ll get to see the proposed changes long before they are approved and implemented.

Given that they only allocated 10 total days in June for the committee to come up with proposed changes and review them there probably won’t be much.

Revision Lite.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't Youngkin going to eliminate this program?

VMPI was cancelled.

VA still legally needs to update the math curriculum (every 7 years).

- and it is likely the VA-DOE leaders will try to incorporate as much of VMPI into the math curriculum update as they can get away with.

Only the head of VA-DOE was replaced by a Youngkin appointee. The rest of the department are dem holdovers, who fully backed VMPI.

Anonymous wrote:Isn't Youngkin going to eliminate this program?

VMPI was cancelled.

VA still legally needs to update the math curriculum (every 7 years).

Isn't Youngkin going to eliminate this program?

pettifogger wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Example curricula if you want to take a look:
https://curriculum.idsucla.org/scope/
https://hsdatascience.youcubed.org/curriculum/

Could offer intro level + more rigorous option.

These look promising (the first link seems more rigorous than the second, but I could not see as much details in the second). One key point: I believe all of these skills cannot be covered in just one class and should be part of a series of classes, if we seriously want to students to develop them and be equipped to work with data. The logical approach would be to expand the CS departments of high schools (which is already badly needed in many many schools) and add a data science series of classes which students could choose to take. One important prerequisite that should be developed would be a semester class in discrete mathematics starting from the ground up (i.e probability followed by statistics, as well as any other important math that kids do not get in the normal classes, i.e basic number theory/graph theory).

One big issue is that it will quite difficult to find teachers who can effectively teach these classes. I don't believe our current teachers are well equipped to teach data science skills (the closest may be some of the existing CS teachers, but they will need to learn some of the math/stats needed to be able to successfully deliver data science classes).

Yes, I believe that is the "goal" of math updates. To add data/stats concepts early on and build over the years. Agree that a series of classes & boosting CS depts (and teacher skills) would make sense.

The 2nd curriculum had more details under "resources". It's very similar to the first from what I could gather.

Anonymous wrote:Example curricula if you want to take a look:
https://curriculum.idsucla.org/scope/
https://hsdatascience.youcubed.org/curriculum/

Could offer intro level + more rigorous option.

These look promising (the first link seems more rigorous than the second, but I could not see as much details in the second). One key point: I believe all of these skills cannot be covered in just one class and should be part of a series of classes, if we seriously want to students to develop them and be equipped to work with data. The logical approach would be to expand the CS departments of high schools (which is already badly needed in many many schools) and add a data science series of classes which students could choose to take. One important prerequisite that should be developed would be a semester class in discrete mathematics starting from the ground up (i.e probability followed by statistics, as well as any other important math that kids do not get in the normal classes, i.e basic number theory/graph theory).

One big issue is that it will quite difficult to find teachers who can effectively teach these classes. I don't believe our current teachers are well equipped to teach data science skills (the closest may be some of the existing CS teachers, but they will need to learn some of the math/stats needed to be able to successfully deliver data science classes).

Example curricula if you want to take a look:
https://curriculum.idsucla.org/scope/
https://hsdatascience.youcubed.org/curriculum/

Could offer intro level + more rigorous option.