Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is nonsense:

Pre-teaching doesn't exist, it's just a made up term.

Schools don't really teach. Teachers mostly just give procedural steps and have students mimic. This is regrettably even more true at the high school level, mainly because the math gets more complicated and students who have not learned anything in earlier years cannot possibly be expected to think on their own.

If a teacher can't teach, they'll throw technology at the students. Unfortunately the tech doesn't do any better than above (still mostly procedural focused on memorization and regurgitation vs critical thinking).

Tutoring is a terrible idea if it babysitting kids through their school homework. It just makes the problem much worse. At the high school level tutoring is pretty toxic, as kids at that age who have to be walked through basic homework just results in stunting their development even more.

Teaching your kids how to think and logically reason is the only way to make significant progress. Start by spending enough time with them; ask them questions, challenge them to ask their own questions, and make sure they stay curious and motivated. They likely won't if you're not.

How is it possible if parent doesn't know math? Most students in remedial have parents who dont remember or didn't do high school math, or didn't attend college. Even with college educated parents how many remember their math?

It's not about math, though the kids who are working through remedial material are often lacking a basic understanding of fractions, number sense, expressions, equations, not necessarily algebra and above. Most parents surely can help there, certainly with a college degree, the majority in the area.

The bigger issue is kids are lacking critical thinking skills in not just math but in all areas. It's just much more apparent in math during tests because one cannot easily hide it. So even if parents don't know math, they can certainly teach their kids how to reason via other topics that they are more familiar with. Even something so divided as politics can be interesting to kids; one could have a political discussion that goes deep into reasoning and critical thinking. Now do this regularly with your child and they will likely develop an appreciation for understanding and learning. When they see nonsense in school and it doesn't make sense to them, they will be motivated to understand, leading them to pick up and read a book and try to teach themselves. If on the other hand, they just see learning as a process of spoon feeding via a tutor or some similar entity, they will never develop the ability to learn.

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is nonsense:

Pre-teaching doesn't exist, it's just a made up term.

Schools don't really teach. Teachers mostly just give procedural steps and have students mimic. This is regrettably even more true at the high school level, mainly because the math gets more complicated and students who have not learned anything in earlier years cannot possibly be expected to think on their own.

If a teacher can't teach, they'll throw technology at the students. Unfortunately the tech doesn't do any better than above (still mostly procedural focused on memorization and regurgitation vs critical thinking).

Tutoring is a terrible idea if it babysitting kids through their school homework. It just makes the problem much worse. At the high school level tutoring is pretty toxic, as kids at that age who have to be walked through basic homework just results in stunting their development even more.

Teaching your kids how to think and logically reason is the only way to make significant progress. Start by spending enough time with them; ask them questions, challenge them to ask their own questions, and make sure they stay curious and motivated. They likely won't if you're not.

How is it possible if parent doesn't know math? Most students in remedial have parents who dont remember or didn't do high school math, or didn't attend college. Even with college educated parents how many remember their math?

This whole thread is nonsense:

Pre-teaching doesn't exist, it's just a made up term.

Schools don't really teach. Teachers mostly just give procedural steps and have students mimic. This is regrettably even more true at the high school level, mainly because the math gets more complicated and students who have not learned anything in earlier years cannot possibly be expected to think on their own.

If a teacher can't teach, they'll throw technology at the students. Unfortunately the tech doesn't do any better than above (still mostly procedural focused on memorization and regurgitation vs critical thinking).

Tutoring is a terrible idea if it babysitting kids through their school homework. It just makes the problem much worse. At the high school level tutoring is pretty toxic, as kids at that age who have to be walked through basic homework just results in stunting their development even more.

Teaching your kids how to think and logically reason is the only way to make significant progress. Start by spending enough time with them; ask them questions, challenge them to ask their own questions, and make sure they stay curious and motivated. They likely won't if you're not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wanted to get input on what is better for underperforming students?

Remediation reteaches content from previous units or grade level that student failed to learn.

Whereas acceleration, would allow underperforming student to start learning new concepts before it is taught in the class, readying the student for new learning alongside their classmates who get it the first time.

Sure acceleration involves parent investing their time at home or making a small investment in outside enrichment like kumon or such. But if FCPS is investing in remediation, shouldn't they be investing in or expected to pay for acceleration if that is a better way for underperforming students to be at the same level as their classmates.

Remediation for skills based subjects (e.g. math, grammar, spelling, phonics) and acceleration for content-based subjects (e.g. science, history, English, etc)

Are you suggesting math is not a content based subject? LOL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math teacher:

It's kind of both. I preteach remedial skills necessary to access grade level skills.
Suppose next week's lesson is solving multistep equations in algebra 1. Then with my double block kids, I'm spending this week reviewing 1 and 2 step equations, the distributive property, and combining like terms (remediation) so that they are ready to hit the ground running with multistep. In class, they will spend 20 minutes reviewing that, but we will spend 2-3 blocks.

When we are going to hit factoring, I spend 2-3 blocks reviewing multiplying binomials, multiplication facts, and exponent laws so that when factoring is introduced they can keep up with the class.

This is not AAP though. If this level of support is needed in AAP, the student is severely misplaced.

It makes zero sense to dive into material that they don't have the foundational knowledge to access.

In your class, before you introduced the new lesson in solving multistep equations, would a remedial bound student benefit from getting a prelesson in that topic, so that your class is not the first time they encounter that new topic? Many "successful students" in your class who attend outside enrichment centers appear to be benefiting from that sort of pre-learning.

Award winning math teacher here… Pre-teaching is how my poorest performing students achieved on grade level. During our intervention block I previewed the upcoming lessons. The result was a boost in performance and in confidence. They actually participated in class because they had less of the cognitive lift needed to access the content.

school board cartoons should be taking advise from teachers like yourself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math teacher:

It's kind of both. I preteach remedial skills necessary to access grade level skills.
Suppose next week's lesson is solving multistep equations in algebra 1. Then with my double block kids, I'm spending this week reviewing 1 and 2 step equations, the distributive property, and combining like terms (remediation) so that they are ready to hit the ground running with multistep. In class, they will spend 20 minutes reviewing that, but we will spend 2-3 blocks.

When we are going to hit factoring, I spend 2-3 blocks reviewing multiplying binomials, multiplication facts, and exponent laws so that when factoring is introduced they can keep up with the class.

This is not AAP though. If this level of support is needed in AAP, the student is severely misplaced.

It makes zero sense to dive into material that they don't have the foundational knowledge to access.

In your class, before you introduced the new lesson in solving multistep equations, would a remedial bound student benefit from getting a prelesson in that topic, so that your class is not the first time they encounter that new topic? Many "successful students" in your class who attend outside enrichment centers appear to be benefiting from that sort of pre-learning.

Award winning math teacher here… Pre-teaching is how my poorest performing students achieved on grade level. During our intervention block I previewed the upcoming lessons. The result was a boost in performance and in confidence. They actually participated in class because they had less of the cognitive lift needed to access the content.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do your thinking your child is going to learn the advanced content if they haven't even grasped the prerequisite content?
Yes it's good to spiral, doing a little of everything, and then a little more of everything, and the repetition helps it sink in, but going ahead to harder stuff before you are ready is disastrous.

that's the question. Is it better to enable repetition with enrichment in advance before school class, as opposed to post-class with remedial?

Yes you should always be studying ahead so you come to school ready to ask questions and work with teacher and classmates on hard problems (in any subject , not just math) not seeing the material for the first time.

This is nonsense. School is for learning, not for review.

You do realize that Teachers assign reading ahead of time precisely so students are prepared for the lecture/learning? I mean, that is the whole point of the assigned reading.

For English class, yes. In college and law school, yes.

In math class? Science class? There isn't "assigned reading". Some teachers do a flipped classroom with an assigned video of the teacher (or Khan Academy, etc.) giving the lecture the night before. That's not assigned reading, though, it's getting the lecture at a different time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do your thinking your child is going to learn the advanced content if they haven't even grasped the prerequisite content?
Yes it's good to spiral, doing a little of everything, and then a little more of everything, and the repetition helps it sink in, but going ahead to harder stuff before you are ready is disastrous.

that's the question. Is it better to enable repetition with enrichment in advance before school class, as opposed to post-class with remedial?

Yes you should always be studying ahead so you come to school ready to ask questions and work with teacher and classmates on hard problems (in any subject , not just math) not seeing the material for the first time.

This is nonsense. School is for learning, not for review.

You do realize that Teachers assign reading ahead of time precisely so students are prepared for the lecture/learning? I mean, that is the whole point of the assigned reading.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wild guess. Without learning-in-advance at outside enrichment center and/or at home, about half of AAP students would be sitting in remedial.

Yes, a surprising number has been paying into these Kumon type places since Pre-K. It’s what keeps RSM, AoPS, Kumon, Mathnasium, Tutoring Club, and Outreach profitable. Many are secretive about it. You learn 7 years later. It’s a shockingly high percentage.

When FCPS knows there is so much demand for above grade math, why are they not adding even higher advanced math classes? Or has local enrichment industry lobbied to keep public school math at a lower level?

The kids taking RSM, AOPS, etc. to preteach material before being taught it in class don't want higher advanced math classes - then they would have to preteach and prelearn those too. They are taking RSM, AOPS "for fun" and in order to get easy As in their school classes without having to worry about getting lower grades while learning for the first time.

I don't understand why so many people want to paint with such a wide brush. There are kids who are attending these programs because they like math and they are really good at it. There are also kids who take the class to pre-learn the material and get an easy A. There are also kids who take the classes because they need to solidify their knowledge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do your thinking your child is going to learn the advanced content if they haven't even grasped the prerequisite content?
Yes it's good to spiral, doing a little of everything, and then a little more of everything, and the repetition helps it sink in, but going ahead to harder stuff before you are ready is disastrous.

that's the question. Is it better to enable repetition with enrichment in advance before school class, as opposed to post-class with remedial?

Yes you should always be studying ahead so you come to school ready to ask questions and work with teacher and classmates on hard problems (in any subject , not just math) not seeing the material for the first time.

This is nonsense. School is for learning, not for review.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wild guess. Without learning-in-advance at outside enrichment center and/or at home, about half of AAP students would be sitting in remedial.

Yes, a surprising number has been paying into these Kumon type places since Pre-K. It’s what keeps RSM, AoPS, Kumon, Mathnasium, Tutoring Club, and Outreach profitable. Many are secretive about it. You learn 7 years later. It’s a shockingly high percentage.

When FCPS knows there is so much demand for above grade math, why are they not adding even higher advanced math classes? Or has local enrichment industry lobbied to keep public school math at a lower level?

The kids taking RSM, AOPS, etc. to preteach material before being taught it in class don't want higher advanced math classes - then they would have to preteach and prelearn those too. They are taking RSM, AOPS "for fun" and in order to get easy As in their school classes without having to worry about getting lower grades while learning for the first time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wild guess. Without learning-in-advance at outside enrichment center and/or at home, about half of AAP students would be sitting in remedial.

Yes, a surprising number has been paying into these Kumon type places since Pre-K. It’s what keeps RSM, AoPS, Kumon, Mathnasium, Tutoring Club, and Outreach profitable. Many are secretive about it. You learn 7 years later. It’s a shockingly high percentage.

When FCPS knows there is so much demand for above grade math, why are they not adding even higher advanced math classes? Or has local enrichment industry lobbied to keep public school math at a lower level?

Anonymous wrote:My wild guess. Without learning-in-advance at outside enrichment center and/or at home, about half of AAP students would be sitting in remedial.

Yes, a surprising number has been paying into these Kumon type places since Pre-K. It’s what keeps RSM, AoPS, Kumon, Mathnasium, Tutoring Club, and Outreach profitable. Many are secretive about it. You learn 7 years later. It’s a shockingly high percentage.

Anonymous wrote:There appears to be a misconception that students who need math remediation do not belong in AAP. Student could have exceptional talent in other areas, like Reading, Science, Visual Arts, Performing Arts, etc?

In middle school you can drop specific subjects and remain in aap English while doing grade level math, for instance. No one should need remediation at that level.

Anonymous wrote:There appears to be a misconception that students who need math remediation do not belong in AAP. Student could have exceptional talent in other areas, like Reading, Science, Visual Arts, Performing Arts, etc?

It’s not a misconception. You should not be in AAP if you need math remediation, as It’s one of the main areas of acceleration in the program. It may not be a student’s strongest subject area but they should be able to keep up.