Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't understand because MCPS hasn't actually built out the courses underneath the four pathways they shared at the BOE yet.

This was the first reply in the thread and the final useful comment.

Yup. And MCPS hasn't built the courses yet because MSDE hasn't told them yet what they are and are not allowed to do for the post-IA pathways-- the MSDE committee on this only just got started and won't wrap up until at least June: https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/pages/dcaa/math/sfvc-secondary-mathematics-pathways.aspx

It sounds Ike MSDE is even less competent than MCPS, which is really saying something.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't understand because MCPS hasn't actually built out the courses underneath the four pathways they shared at the BOE yet.

This was the first reply in the thread and the final useful comment.

Yup. And MCPS hasn't built the courses yet because MSDE hasn't told them yet what they are and are not allowed to do for the post-IA pathways-- the MSDE committee on this only just got started and won't wrap up until at least June: https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/pages/dcaa/math/sfvc-secondary-mathematics-pathways.aspx

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't understand because MCPS hasn't actually built out the courses underneath the four pathways they shared at the BOE yet.

This was the first reply in the thread and the final useful comment.

Yup. And MCPS hasn't built the courses yet because MSDE hasn't told them yet what they are and are not allowed to do for the post-IA pathways-- the MSDE committee on this only just got started and won't wrap up until at least June: https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/pages/dcaa/math/sfvc-secondary-mathematics-pathways.aspx

Ashley Mack (Parent Representative), Program Coordinator, Montgomery County

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't understand because MCPS hasn't actually built out the courses underneath the four pathways they shared at the BOE yet.

This was the first reply in the thread and the final useful comment.

Yup. And MCPS hasn't built the courses yet because MSDE hasn't told them yet what they are and are not allowed to do for the post-IA pathways-- the MSDE committee on this only just got started and won't wrap up until at least June: https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/pages/dcaa/math/sfvc-secondary-mathematics-pathways.aspx

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't understand because MCPS hasn't actually built out the courses underneath the four pathways they shared at the BOE yet.

This was the first reply in the thread and the final useful comment.

Anonymous wrote:You don't understand because MCPS hasn't actually built out the courses underneath the four pathways they shared at the BOE yet.

Anonymous wrote:Welp, this is going to be a ton more business for me as a private tutor. There are many kids already who have difficulty in Algebra in 8th grade (which is at grade now), and those kids are often the same ones who struggle in Alg 2 and precalc, but it’s not because they need integrated algebra and geometry - that’s not going to fix anything.

I am old enough to remember when MCPS offered “Unified Math” to bright kids in middle school and HS. It didn’t last long.

I really don’t understand why we keep reinventing the wheel in an effort to teach kids math. The math curriculum itself is not the problem.

This is also stupid from the perspective of SAT and ACT performance, which does not require precalc or even Algebra 2. It’s hard enough to for an 11th grader to remember Alg and Geom now, it makes no sense to push it earlier (and further away) in the memory bank. Same goes for Chemistry and Physics, which require a lot of algebra and geometry. Kids who take those in 10, 11 and 12 will have weaker math skills.

Also not great for a good chunk of college math and science majors.

I guess it’s good if your kid wants to take math classes after Calc - but right now that is a tiny fraction of kids, and not at all necessary for entry into top tier colleges.

Anonymous wrote:Welp, this is going to be a ton more business for
…..This is also stupid from the perspective of SAT and ACT performance, which does not require precalc or even Algebra 2. It’s hard enough to for an 11th grader to remember Alg and Geom now, it makes no sense to push it earlier (and further away) in the memory bank. Same goes for Chemistry and Physics, which require a lot of algebra and geometry. Kids who take those in 10, 11 and 12 will have weaker math skills.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there is no more Geometry? What is the rationale?

Likely the same rationale that removed Trigonometry

Why would they remove trig. It is useful physics and engineering

Trig has been gone for a long time. Currently kids take Alg 1, Geo, Alg 2, Pre Calc, Calc

Anonymous wrote:If your kid is currently in prealgebra in 6th, could they "drop down" to whatever option in 7th so then they could be in the Integrated Pathway moving forward? Or is it better to do Alg 1 in 7th and then Geometry in 8th? Have heard both arguments.

Anonymous wrote:Welp, this is going to be a ton more business for me as a private tutor. There are many kids already who have difficulty in Algebra in 8th grade (which is at grade now), and those kids are often the same ones who struggle in Alg 2 and precalc, but it’s not because they need integrated algebra and geometry - that’s not going to fix anything.

I am old enough to remember when MCPS offered “Unified Math” to bright kids in middle school and HS. It didn’t last long.

I really don’t understand why we keep reinventing the wheel in an effort to teach kids math. The math curriculum itself is not the problem.

This is also stupid from the perspective of SAT and ACT performance, which does not require precalc or even Algebra 2. It’s hard enough to for an 11th grader to remember Alg and Geom now, it makes no sense to push it earlier (and further away) in the memory bank. Same goes for Chemistry and Physics, which require a lot of algebra and geometry. Kids who take those in 10, 11 and 12 will have weaker math skills.

Also not great for a good chunk of college math and science majors.

I guess it’s good if your kid wants to take math classes after Calc - but right now that is a tiny fraction of kids, and not at all necessary for entry into top tier colleges.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Welp, this is going to be a ton more business for me as a private tutor. There are many kids already who have difficulty in Algebra in 8th grade (which is at grade now), and those kids are often the same ones who struggle in Alg 2 and precalc, but it’s not because they need integrated algebra and geometry - that’s not going to fix anything.

I am old enough to remember when MCPS offered “Unified Math” to bright kids in middle school and HS. It didn’t last long.

I really don’t understand why we keep reinventing the wheel in an effort to teach kids math. The math curriculum itself is not the problem.

This is also stupid from the perspective of SAT and ACT performance, which does not require precalc or even Algebra 2. It’s hard enough to for an 11th grader to remember Alg and Geom now, it makes no sense to push it earlier (and further away) in the memory bank. Same goes for Chemistry and Physics, which require a lot of algebra and geometry. Kids who take those in 10, 11 and 12 will have weaker math skills.

Also not great for a good chunk of college math and science majors.

I guess it’s good if your kid wants to take math classes after Calc - but right now that is a tiny fraction of kids, and not at all necessary for entry into top tier colleges.

I also tutor and agree. This desire to rush rush to a very specific end is misguided for most kids. They could slow down and put a ton of geometry into k-8. I find a lot of kids LOVE geometry. It’s too bad they will be short changed.