In our base HS, child did not even have to review before the test to get an A. Homework is minimal and completed at school. Yet ended up with 101% in math course due to bonus points.

At TJ, child puts in the effort to review the material, practice all the homework problems and still finds the tests reasonably challenging.

Kudos to TJ teachers for actually keeping the standards high.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's not nonsense. Based on what I've seen with my TJ sophomore, it feels pretty accurate.

He would say that the math department teaching is the weakest in the school by far. He's doing well because he puts in hours each night to teach himself. He's had 4 math teachers already and will have had 5 by the end of this year - a different one each semester plus one change mid-semester due to a teacher leaving - and out of all of them he's only had one who he felt was effective. This has not been his experience in the other subjects, where he's had strong instruction.

He loved math before he came to TJ, and while he's still getting As he has lost much of his joy for the subject. He seems to be slowly finding it again now that he's with the effective teacher, which tells me that it's at least partly the instruction, not just the progressive difficulty of the subject, that changed his feelings.

He's a kid who might not have gotten in under the old system (not from a traditional feeder and not a math testing genius) but he's getting straight As and enjoying his TJ experience. The math department has been the one consistent area of disappointment for him, and he knows many other kids who feel the same.

My child loved Math before, and now loves TJ Math even more. Maybe he got lucky with all good teachers thus far.

With RS1, it is mostly introductory topics in statistics and probability, quite different from algebra/geometry oriented middle school math. Reading the textbook and going through khan academy videos beforehand helps, as data analysis seems easy on the surface but requires attention to detail, and TJ teachers rightfully demand it.

With regard to semester breakdown of Math courses, it is to support the diverse students entering with different levels of math from five different feeder public school systems. Irrespective of semester or year long format, TJ Math 4,5, and optional 6, are all precalculus topics, which are taught at a rapid pace and at an in-depth level, that middle schoolers are not used to, unless they are mentally prepared and put in the daily effort in/after class.

IMHO, it's unfair to point fingers at the TJ Math curriculum or teachers; instead, the issue lies in the lack of rigor in middle school math. Middle school students are taught math at a superficial level, using cycles of concept introduction followed by short quizzes, and quickly moving onto next concept. What's missing is the essential practice of solving a diverse range of math problems to truly grasp and delve into the depth of each concept. A student may get all As in middle school math, but could struggle when they get to high school precalculus even at base school.

Thank you for the insight. I can tell you my child is far from reading the textbook, but does not know there is one for this class. They have been spoiled with getting As by reading limited study guides and not having to tough the texbook. Respect to the TJ teachers for holding kids to rigorous standards.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's not nonsense. Based on what I've seen with my TJ sophomore, it feels pretty accurate.

He would say that the math department teaching is the weakest in the school by far. He's doing well because he puts in hours each night to teach himself. He's had 4 math teachers already and will have had 5 by the end of this year - a different one each semester plus one change mid-semester due to a teacher leaving - and out of all of them he's only had one who he felt was effective. This has not been his experience in the other subjects, where he's had strong instruction.

He loved math before he came to TJ, and while he's still getting As he has lost much of his joy for the subject. He seems to be slowly finding it again now that he's with the effective teacher, which tells me that it's at least partly the instruction, not just the progressive difficulty of the subject, that changed his feelings.

He's a kid who might not have gotten in under the old system (not from a traditional feeder and not a math testing genius) but he's getting straight As and enjoying his TJ experience. The math department has been the one consistent area of disappointment for him, and he knows many other kids who feel the same.

My child loved Math before, and now loves TJ Math even more. Maybe he got lucky with all good teachers thus far.

With RS1, it is mostly introductory topics in statistics and probability, quite different from algebra/geometry oriented middle school math. Reading the textbook and going through khan academy videos beforehand helps, as data analysis seems easy on the surface but requires attention to detail, and TJ teachers rightfully demand it.

With regard to semester breakdown of Math courses, it is to support the diverse students entering with different levels of math from five different feeder public school systems. Irrespective of semester or year long format, TJ Math 4,5, and optional 6, are all precalculus topics, which are taught at a rapid pace and at an in-depth level, that middle schoolers are not used to, unless they are mentally prepared and put in the daily effort in/after class.

IMHO, it's unfair to point fingers at the TJ Math curriculum or teachers; instead, the issue lies in the lack of rigor in middle school math. Middle school students are taught math at a superficial level, using cycles of concept introduction followed by short quizzes, and quickly moving onto next concept. What's missing is the essential practice of solving a diverse range of math problems to truly grasp and delve into the depth of each concept. A student may get all As in middle school math, but could struggle when they get to high school precalculus even at base school.

And this is exactly why my kid works through all kinds of various math contest questions at home..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have 2 kids at TJ including a freshman. Older kid said they piloted a new RS curriculum last year for some sections of the then freshman (class of 2025). It was much easier (less content convered) than the traditional RS1 class from previous years and I understand for this years freshman class, all students have the new (easier) RS1 curriculum that is likely here to stay.

Conveniently aligned with the entrance of the first class under the new equity-focused admissions policy

Why does TJ put kids through this suffering of admitting under prepared middle school kids without evaluation test, and then ask them to accept poor grades as their fate?

That’s one take on it. Here’s another. TJ is not just a math school. When they altered their admissions requirements, they dropped the standardized math test as a gatekeeper. Now they don’t get a full class of math geniuses. They get kids with other strengths. Like cs or engineering. This has exposed an instruction problem in the TJ math department. Kids are doing fine in Cs, Bio, design & tech. Math department is weak instructionally. They’ve been coasting for years by getting kids who already know the math as part of the TJ math prep machine. No more test, fewer obsessive math preppers. Now math teachers have to teach. And many aren’t great at it.

That's a nice thought, but how exactly are they detecting kids who are strong in other arenas through pretty generic essays? I'm all for seeking out kids who excel in different STEM arenas, even if they're weaker in math. There should be some objective metric showing that a kid is strong in another arena and not just an above average kid who gets As in middle school, where every kid putting in a modicum of effort sails to an easy A.

Anonymous wrote:What is this RS 1 math textbook people keep mentioning? My freshman child does not have a math textbook.

Textbook is accessible in pdf format through their schoology classroom

Workshop Statistics Rossman, Chance Wiley 978-0470-542088

What is this RS 1 math textbook people keep mentioning? My freshman child does not have a math textbook.

That is why I teacher my kids at home with the math textbooks and let they do the practice after each chapter because it is not enough if you only depend on school.

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's not nonsense. Based on what I've seen with my TJ sophomore, it feels pretty accurate.

He would say that the math department teaching is the weakest in the school by far. He's doing well because he puts in hours each night to teach himself. He's had 4 math teachers already and will have had 5 by the end of this year - a different one each semester plus one change mid-semester due to a teacher leaving - and out of all of them he's only had one who he felt was effective. This has not been his experience in the other subjects, where he's had strong instruction.

He loved math before he came to TJ, and while he's still getting As he has lost much of his joy for the subject. He seems to be slowly finding it again now that he's with the effective teacher, which tells me that it's at least partly the instruction, not just the progressive difficulty of the subject, that changed his feelings.

He's a kid who might not have gotten in under the old system (not from a traditional feeder and not a math testing genius) but he's getting straight As and enjoying his TJ experience. The math department has been the one consistent area of disappointment for him, and he knows many other kids who feel the same.

My child loved Math before, and now loves TJ Math even more. Maybe he got lucky with all good teachers thus far.

With RS1, it is mostly introductory topics in statistics and probability, quite different from algebra/geometry oriented middle school math. Reading the textbook and going through khan academy videos beforehand helps, as data analysis seems easy on the surface but requires attention to detail, and TJ teachers rightfully demand it.

With regard to semester breakdown of Math courses, it is to support the diverse students entering with different levels of math from five different feeder public school systems. Irrespective of semester or year long format, TJ Math 4,5, and optional 6, are all precalculus topics, which are taught at a rapid pace and at an in-depth level, that middle schoolers are not used to, unless they are mentally prepared and put in the daily effort in/after class.

IMHO, it's unfair to point fingers at the TJ Math curriculum or teachers; instead, the issue lies in the lack of rigor in middle school math. Middle school students are taught math at a superficial level, using cycles of concept introduction followed by short quizzes, and quickly moving onto next concept. What's missing is the essential practice of solving a diverse range of math problems to truly grasp and delve into the depth of each concept. A student may get all As in middle school math, but could struggle when they get to high school precalculus even at base school.

Anonymous wrote:My experience is if parents can help your kids in math and RS, it will be very easier to let your kids to study them well, and save your kids many time. That is why I have to see my kid's math textbooks earlier.

You are being a supportive parent. If kids get some insight into what the course is about, they can prepare themselves better to be successful in that course.

My experience is if parents can help your kids in math and RS, it will be very easier to let your kids to study them well, and save your kids many time. That is why I have to see my kid's math textbooks earlier.

I agree that it's not nonsense. Based on what I've seen with my TJ sophomore, it feels pretty accurate.

He would say that the math department teaching is the weakest in the school by far. He's doing well because he puts in hours each night to teach himself. He's had 4 math teachers already and will have had 5 by the end of this year - a different one each semester plus one change mid-semester due to a teacher leaving - and out of all of them he's only had one who he felt was effective. This has not been his experience in the other subjects, where he's had strong instruction.

He loved math before he came to TJ, and while he's still getting As he has lost much of his joy for the subject. He seems to be slowly finding it again now that he's with the effective teacher, which tells me that it's at least partly the instruction, not just the progressive difficulty of the subject, that changed his feelings.

He's a kid who might not have gotten in under the old system (not from a traditional feeder and not a math testing genius) but he's getting straight As and enjoying his TJ experience. The math department has been the one consistent area of disappointment for him, and he knows many other kids who feel the same.

Eh. Not nonsense. If you have kids at TJ this makes some sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have 2 kids at TJ including a freshman. Older kid said they piloted a new RS curriculum last year for some sections of the then freshman (class of 2025). It was much easier (less content convered) than the traditional RS1 class from previous years and I understand for this years freshman class, all students have the new (easier) RS1 curriculum that is likely here to stay.

Conveniently aligned with the entrance of the first class under the new equity-focused admissions policy

Why does TJ put kids through this suffering of admitting under prepared middle school kids without evaluation test, and then ask them to accept poor grades as their fate?

That’s one take on it. Here’s another. TJ is not just a math school. When they altered their admissions requirements, they dropped the standardized math test as a gatekeeper. Now they don’t get a full class of math geniuses. They get kids with other strengths. Like cs or engineering. This has exposed an instruction problem in the TJ math department. Kids are doing fine in Cs, Bio, design & tech. Math department is weak instructionally. They’ve been coasting for years by getting kids who already know the math as part of the TJ math prep machine. No more test, fewer obsessive math preppers. Now math teachers have to teach. And many aren’t great at it.

This is pure nonsense. Utter nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have 2 kids at TJ including a freshman. Older kid said they piloted a new RS curriculum last year for some sections of the then freshman (class of 2025). It was much easier (less content convered) than the traditional RS1 class from previous years and I understand for this years freshman class, all students have the new (easier) RS1 curriculum that is likely here to stay.

Conveniently aligned with the entrance of the first class under the new equity-focused admissions policy

Why does TJ put kids through this suffering of admitting under prepared middle school kids without evaluation test, and then ask them to accept poor grades as their fate?

That’s one take on it. Here’s another. TJ is not just a math school. When they altered their admissions requirements, they dropped the standardized math test as a gatekeeper. Now they don’t get a full class of math geniuses. They get kids with other strengths. Like cs or engineering. This has exposed an instruction problem in the TJ math department. Kids are doing fine in Cs, Bio, design & tech. Math department is weak instructionally. They’ve been coasting for years by getting kids who already know the math as part of the TJ math prep machine. No more test, fewer obsessive math preppers. Now math teachers have to teach. And many aren’t great at it.

Do you have any proof for all these claims you're making, or is this just an opinion? Hopefully you also realize that the sciences and CS also use quite a bit of math, which doesn't help your additional claim that everyone is doing well in the other subjects. It's much more likely that overall, TJ teachers are quite good across all departments, so yeah... you'll need some actual evidence to make this take believable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have 2 kids at TJ including a freshman. Older kid said they piloted a new RS curriculum last year for some sections of the then freshman (class of 2025). It was much easier (less content convered) than the traditional RS1 class from previous years and I understand for this years freshman class, all students have the new (easier) RS1 curriculum that is likely here to stay.

Conveniently aligned with the entrance of the first class under the new equity-focused admissions policy

Why does TJ put kids through this suffering of admitting under prepared middle school kids without evaluation test, and then ask them to accept poor grades as their fate?

That’s one take on it. Here’s another. TJ is not just a math school. When they altered their admissions requirements, they dropped the standardized math test as a gatekeeper. Now they don’t get a full class of math geniuses. They get kids with other strengths. Like cs or engineering. This has exposed an instruction problem in the TJ math department. Kids are doing fine in Cs, Bio, design & tech. Math department is weak instructionally. They’ve been coasting for years by getting kids who already know the math as part of the TJ math prep machine. No more test, fewer obsessive math preppers. Now math teachers have to teach. And many aren’t great at it.