Ah, the moron/liar who can’t read again.

Let’s go straight to the website:

The implementation of VMPI would still allow for student acceleration in mathematics content according to ability and achievement. It does not dictate how and when students take specific courses. Those decisions remain with students and school divisions based on individualized learning needs.

The traditional high school pathway culminating in the study of Calculus or other advanced courses is not being eliminated. Additional course pathways will include engaging semester courses in statistics, data science, modeling, design, and logic, among others.

Local school divisions will still have plenty of flexibility to create courses aligned to the standards to meet the needs of all students; and provide opportunities for all students to advance through the curriculum based on their learning needs. School divisions will also be able to offer advanced sections and acceleration through the courses.

Anonymous wrote:
Acceleration is exactly how school districts can provide advanced math today. And VDOE has explicitly said that they are not banning acceleration or advanced classes/tracking. So this continued handwringing sounds...contrived.

Ah, there's the VMPI denier again, claiming they don't intend to ban acceleration...

Let's see what the main representatives from VDOE actually said about acceleration...

Let's go straight to the transcripts, shall we?

so if you come into your own mathematically in seventh grade
too bad you aren't on the right track you don't get to go take calculus in
high school so a track is very limiting
to all children even the children who are on the highest
track they get stuck and you can't get out of
it and if you what if you didn't have such great
success or you needed a stronger
foundation in algebra one because
everything builds on that
too bad you took it you got to keep
moving on the track it's like a train
you're stuck um acceleration
chuck and i were just talking about this
the other day in the definition
of acceleration because we always think
of it as just moving just about speed i learned how to
multiply all of my times tables before third
grade so in third grade you better teach
me my two times tables over double digit and
triple digit and quadruple digit because that's what's
next and i'm ready to go faster
um so that is one form of acceleration that we have used
in mathematics but oddly not in all other subject areas
are you ready to jump in thank you for
the transition um so we were talking about it i was
talking about the fact that in physics
acceleration is also a change in
direction and i think we kind of came up with or
trying to play with a good analogy that if we're all on a
river going kind of the same direction this is
an opportunity for someone to change
direction go a little bit deeper
this is an opportunity for an ability to
study the concepts a little bit more
be able to do that deeper learning and
make those connections other things
whether it be science whether it be some real world
problems that you can tie the math to
it's an opportunity to be able to do
that so that acceleration
could be depth rather than just being
able to push further faster down that
river
so i think taking a look at that and
that there's a range of depth depending
where the capacity of the student is and
their interest and you know what
also provides that chance rather than a
kid being on a track that stuck forever
some kids are going to resonate with
certain parts of the math lessons with
different activities different content
areas
better than others and that gives them a
chance to still dive deep where they
feel that they're connected with the
math
and hopefully find the math that
resonates most with them so they can
pick those pathways later on in high
school
and hopefully influence their decisions
on career pathways
so i think that that depth gives us a
little bit more importance and capacity
to be able to play with
the math a little bit differently and be
able to appreciate
how it fits into our everyday lives is
that what we were talking about shelly
hopefully i just didn't dream that
that is exactly it and and you said
depth and i'm thinking that
differentiation was the word that was in
the question and so
what that says is go ahead yeah
that's i you're right i use the
different term for that
but that differentiation is an
opportunity for some of the people to
dive
deeper into some of that and be able to
experience some of the math
and different connections differently
because
that's what resonates with them so yeah
just connecting back thank you for

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry if we haven't surveyed every school system in the state, or if the other districts haven't announced plans yet.
Bottom line, at least two data points that show what VMPI will mean, despite their walkback and your claims of 'it was just some suggestions'.

So you think VMPI will ban acceleration / advanced math?

As explained on the deleted thread, they consider algebra 2 as not necessary for high schoolers, yet they claim they are including it in 10th grade math.
It will be a weak version at best, leading to not having enough to take calculus. This is OK for VMPI, as they don't care about people taking calculus in high school. They just include it so they can claim, "Don't worry, we still have calculus available".
Their push is for detracking in the name of equity, holding back acceleration and honors classes. They claim they are doing otherwise, but they have made their opinions clear. Site admin isn't aware of it, but detracking means you are eliminating advanced math.

These blended classes allow them to hide how much they are holding kids back.
It would be possible for school districts to get around it, but beyond accelerating, they would need to develop a stronger curriculum than what VMPI proposes. I don't see any districts doing that, though in many places I suspect there is no separate staff so perhaps with a good teacher and acceleration some kids will be able to take calculus properly.
Loudoun has adopted VMPI's thinking and has moved backwards, and kids will end up taking algebra in 9th grade instead of current 6th or 7th grade.

Acceleration is exactly how school districts can provide advanced math today. And VDOE has explicitly said that they are not banning acceleration or advanced classes/tracking. So this continued handwringing sounds...contrived.

The default path today does NOT include calculus. So if they end up providing a path does that include calculus then they would be providing *more* advanced math.

Until they come out with more specifics about what concepts would be included in what "course" it's all speculation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry if we haven't surveyed every school system in the state, or if the other districts haven't announced plans yet.
Bottom line, at least two data points that show what VMPI will mean, despite their walkback and your claims of 'it was just some suggestions'.

So you think VMPI will ban acceleration / advanced math?

As explained on the deleted thread, they consider algebra 2 as not necessary for high schoolers, yet they claim they are including it in 10th grade math.
It will be a weak version at best, leading to not having enough to take calculus. This is OK for VMPI, as they don't care about people taking calculus in high school. They just include it so they can claim, "Don't worry, we still have calculus available".
Their push is for detracking in the name of equity, holding back acceleration and honors classes. They claim they are doing otherwise, but they have made their opinions clear. Site admin isn't aware of it, but detracking means you are eliminating advanced math.

These blended classes allow them to hide how much they are holding kids back.
It would be possible for school districts to get around it, but beyond accelerating, they would need to develop a stronger curriculum than what VMPI proposes. I don't see any districts doing that, though in many places I suspect there is no separate staff so perhaps with a good teacher and acceleration some kids will be able to take calculus properly.
Loudoun has adopted VMPI's thinking and has moved backwards, and kids will end up taking algebra in 9th grade instead of current 6th or 7th grade.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry if we haven't surveyed every school system in the state, or if the other districts haven't announced plans yet.
Bottom line, at least two data points that show what VMPI will mean, despite their walkback and your claims of 'it was just some suggestions'.

So you think VMPI will ban acceleration / advanced math?

If they had their way, they certainly would.

Go and listen to their published webinars and briefings and observe the bile and hatred they show towards students who are interested and good in math.
Youtube has the transcripts (click on the ..., then Open Transcripts); just type in VMPI.

In the bizarre Newspeak world of the VMPI protagonists, children who are interested and good in math are selected based on "perceived ability," forced into "tracks" from which they cannot escape, whereas students who show less interest and/or aptitude for math are "isolated" in low-performing groups. This is somehow inequitable, therefore, some must be giving up their "privilege," and all must be doing "group work" in "heterogeneous classrooms" until including 10th grade. (Everything I put in quotes are, well, quotations from statements they made or material they've published.)

This was the original proposal, and this is how it would still be had they not been temporarily rebuked. And this may well be how it will be depending on who runs the VA government after the Nov elections.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry if we haven't surveyed every school system in the state, or if the other districts haven't announced plans yet.
Bottom line, at least two data points that show what VMPI will mean, despite their walkback and your claims of 'it was just some suggestions'.

So you think VMPI will ban acceleration / advanced math?

DP, but I think it depends on if parents and math teachers and ES teachers continue to tell them that's a bad idea. Jay Matthews wrote an entire article on the premise that VMPI wouldn't ban acceleration only because the BOE doesn't want to deal with angry parents at their meetings.

If they think they can get away with it, though, I think they may try. As far as I can tell, they already did.

Anonymous wrote:Sorry if we haven't surveyed every school system in the state, or if the other districts haven't announced plans yet.
Bottom line, at least two data points that show what VMPI will mean, despite their walkback and your claims of 'it was just some suggestions'.

So you think VMPI will ban acceleration / advanced math?

Sorry if we haven't surveyed every school system in the state, or if the other districts haven't announced plans yet.
Bottom line, at least two data points that show what VMPI will mean, despite their walkback and your claims of 'it was just some suggestions'.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most likely in 2016 whatever VA DOE decided was implemented without pushback, and this is what they expected this time around as well.

If LCPS was looking to shift the blame, they would reverse the changes. Instead, they are on board with what VMPI wants to do.

Or LCPS wants these changes and is blaming VMPI.

Other area school systems slowed down the acceleration in middle school. Completely unrelated to VMPI.

It's possible that LCPS was already considering that and just worded it as "VPMI changes".

Anyway, VMPI hasn't "decided" anything yet. They don't even have a draft out yet, so it wasn't a "VMPI change".

Are you intentionally or unintentionally ignoring the fact that Loudon was not alone in doing this?

Which other school systems have already changed their curriculum "because of VMPI"?

I literally quoted an article about it last page. Henry County had a whole extremely helpful SB presentation their local news did a story on.

So two school systems jumped the gun? Out of how many school systems in VA? Looks like 227. So those other 225 school systems must be in big trouble for not making changes after they were “told this was definitely happening”.

Maybe these two were already looking to slow acceleration - as other school districts have done before VMPI - and just used VMPI discussions as a catalyst for making the changes now.

Anonymous wrote:In addition, if there is no proposal and no draft, just some changes, why did you suggest a title change of 'VA DOE making changes to math curriculum'?
That is not what happens with mere suggestions.

Because they update the math curriculum every 7 years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no misinformation, just your choosing to believe VMPI's current statements over their past statements, even when they have clearly lied about 'this has always been the case' that school districts could do tracking and acceleration.
They clearly backtracked and pretended it was not a backtrack. This is a lie.

Even with the backtracking, it is still a taking away of advanced math in practice, because VMPI is kind of winging it trying to do multiple things at once.
They want to put algebra/geometry/algebra 2 blended together in grades 8-10 so as to maintain a path to calculus.
Then they want this to be available for all students, so they are throwing prealgebra in there as well in the same grades 8-10.

Wait...

Gen ed parent here.

What happened to Algebra in 7th/Geometry in 8th??

VDOE is now saying you could take “Essential Concepts1” starting in 7th to be done by 9th if your district offered that, which would theoretically put you in the same place as Algebra I in 7th.

They didn’t say that at first.

They also didn’t say they couldn’t...

They didn’t explicitly say one way or another.

In the current math curriculum there isn’t anything explicit about acceleration. Math 8 is presumably for 8th graders even though many kids learn those concepts before 8th grade.

Anonymous wrote:
Wait...

Gen ed parent here.

What happened to Algebra in 7th/Geometry in 8th??

The main thread was deleted, but you can search for VMPI in the FCPS and nonFCPS threads for some long discussions.

In addition, if there is no proposal and no draft, just some changes, why did you suggest a title change of 'VA DOE making changes to math curriculum'?
That is not what happens with mere suggestions.

You keep saying there is no proposal.
Yet Tina Mazzacane referred to VMPI's 'proposals' in her e-mails.

VMPI proposals do promote equity and that the practice of isolating low-achieving students in low-level or slower-paced mathematics groups should be eliminated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no misinformation, just your choosing to believe VMPI's current statements over their past statements, even when they have clearly lied about 'this has always been the case' that school districts could do tracking and acceleration.
They clearly backtracked and pretended it was not a backtrack. This is a lie.

Even with the backtracking, it is still a taking away of advanced math in practice, because VMPI is kind of winging it trying to do multiple things at once.
They want to put algebra/geometry/algebra 2 blended together in grades 8-10 so as to maintain a path to calculus.
Then they want this to be available for all students, so they are throwing prealgebra in there as well in the same grades 8-10.

Wait...

Gen ed parent here.

What happened to Algebra in 7th/Geometry in 8th??

VMPI has links up about how this is inequitable.
They claim it will still be available and up to local school districts, though not as individual classes. Meanwhile LCPS is getting rid of this as well as some other divisions. So far, they have gotten rid of algebra in 6th, geometry in 7th, and have only reduced the number of kids taking algebra in 7th by about 90%. Starting 2022-2023 they will eliminate algebra in 7th grade.