Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:As a parent of a 4th grader in the E3 pilot, I am more concerned with my child learning the same math skills generally as the peers he'll be going to middle school with. If E3 continues in 5th and 6th, is the content the same that other 5th and 6th graders in our pyramid are learning? If not, what happens when they all meet up in 7th grade - at any level - 7th General Math, Math 7 Honors, or Algebra as 7th graders. Whatever level they are, as a parent, it's a little nerve-wracking to have your child piloting a new math curriculum. Especially since we've gotten no insight into content differences between E3 and whatever everyone else is doing is called. I guess we'll see how the pilot kids do on the SOL . . .
You concerns are valid. Thats why these schools were chosen. I suspect that the next 10 schools of the pilot will be part of the existing middle school pyramids, so that there isnt any peer discrepancies. Or not many.
Anonymous wrote:As a parent of a 4th grader in the E3 pilot, I am more concerned with my child learning the same math skills generally as the peers he'll be going to middle school with. If E3 continues in 5th and 6th, is the content the same that other 5th and 6th graders in our pyramid are learning? If not, what happens when they all meet up in 7th grade - at any level - 7th General Math, Math 7 Honors, or Algebra as 7th graders. Whatever level they are, as a parent, it's a little nerve-wracking to have your child piloting a new math curriculum. Especially since we've gotten no insight into content differences between E3 and whatever everyone else is doing is called. I guess we'll see how the pilot kids do on the SOL . . .
Anonymous wrote:As a parent of a 4th grader in the E3 pilot, I am more concerned with my child learning the same math skills generally as the peers he'll be going to middle school with. If E3 continues in 5th and 6th, is the content the same that other 5th and 6th graders in our pyramid are learning? If not, what happens when they all meet up in 7th grade - at any level - 7th General Math, Math 7 Honors, or Algebra as 7th graders. Whatever level they are, as a parent, it's a little nerve-wracking to have your child piloting a new math curriculum. Especially since we've gotten no insight into content differences between E3 and whatever everyone else is doing is called. I guess we'll see how the pilot kids do on the SOL . . .
Anonymous wrote:As a parent of a 4th grader in the E3 pilot, I am more concerned with my child learning the same math skills generally as the peers he'll be going to middle school with. If E3 continues in 5th and 6th, is the content the same that other 5th and 6th graders in our pyramid are learning? If not, what happens when they all meet up in 7th grade - at any level - 7th General Math, Math 7 Honors, or Algebra as 7th graders. Whatever level they are, as a parent, it's a little nerve-wracking to have your child piloting a new math curriculum. Especially since we've gotten no insight into content differences between E3 and whatever everyone else is doing is called. I guess we'll see how the pilot kids do on the SOL . . .
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rolling Valley is piloting E3 this school year (22-23). I have a 4th grader who was designated at an advanced math student (level III AAP but additionally qualified for advanced math), but now instead of doing the combined 4th and 5th curriculum in a group with a designated teacher (our old model), they receive extensions to the lesson the entire class gets during class "when needed". We have not been told what will happen in 5th grade as far as whether they'll get the 6th grade content and take the 6th grade SOL.
Is the entire class able to master the advanced math they now try to teach?
In my own teaching experience, children of the same age learn at different rates and abilities.
Based on what another PP said, it sounds like they are teaching the entire class grade level content, with advanced math content being offered as extensions as needed. FCPS argues that rigor is raised for all students with E3 but they define rigor as going deeper into grade level content. Others would define rigor based on the content covered. By that latter metric, rigor has not been raised for all. Formerly advanced math kids now have to rely on extensions in a heterogenous class to get content that would otherwise have been covered in their base advanced math class prior to E3. Depending on how often extensions are provided, formerly advanced math kids could have less rigor (as measured by content covered) under E3. It is hard for teachers to differentiate in heterogenous classes; extensions are not as reliable as having a class with peers learning the same advanced material.
Thanks. That is what I thought they were doing.
This seems to be another anti-merit, “equity” initiative, like the one described here:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113951.page
How are extensions anti-merit? Shouldn't the "merit" kids be able to handle them?
It's not clear whether these extensions are grade level or advanced content. If the former, kids would lose access to advanced content altogether. FCPS needs to share details on how E3 works as well as its implications for the accelerated math pathway.
I think the idea of these extensions is to spiral into deeper concepts within a given topic rather than move to the next topic. This keeps everyone together, but advanced minds busy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rolling Valley is piloting E3 this school year (22-23). I have a 4th grader who was designated at an advanced math student (level III AAP but additionally qualified for advanced math), but now instead of doing the combined 4th and 5th curriculum in a group with a designated teacher (our old model), they receive extensions to the lesson the entire class gets during class "when needed". We have not been told what will happen in 5th grade as far as whether they'll get the 6th grade content and take the 6th grade SOL.
Is the entire class able to master the advanced math they now try to teach?
In my own teaching experience, children of the same age learn at different rates and abilities.
Based on what another PP said, it sounds like they are teaching the entire class grade level content, with advanced math content being offered as extensions as needed. FCPS argues that rigor is raised for all students with E3 but they define rigor as going deeper into grade level content. Others would define rigor based on the content covered. By that latter metric, rigor has not been raised for all. Formerly advanced math kids now have to rely on extensions in a heterogenous class to get content that would otherwise have been covered in their base advanced math class prior to E3. Depending on how often extensions are provided, formerly advanced math kids could have less rigor (as measured by content covered) under E3. It is hard for teachers to differentiate in heterogenous classes; extensions are not as reliable as having a class with peers learning the same advanced material.
Thanks. That is what I thought they were doing.
This seems to be another anti-merit, “equity” initiative, like the one described here:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113951.page
How are extensions anti-merit? Shouldn't the "merit" kids be able to handle them?
It's not clear whether these extensions are grade level or advanced content. If the former, kids would lose access to advanced content altogether. FCPS needs to share details on how E3 works as well as its implications for the accelerated math pathway.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rolling Valley is piloting E3 this school year (22-23). I have a 4th grader who was designated at an advanced math student (level III AAP but additionally qualified for advanced math), but now instead of doing the combined 4th and 5th curriculum in a group with a designated teacher (our old model), they receive extensions to the lesson the entire class gets during class "when needed". We have not been told what will happen in 5th grade as far as whether they'll get the 6th grade content and take the 6th grade SOL.
Is the entire class able to master the advanced math they now try to teach?
In my own teaching experience, children of the same age learn at different rates and abilities.
Based on what another PP said, it sounds like they are teaching the entire class grade level content, with advanced math content being offered as extensions as needed. FCPS argues that rigor is raised for all students with E3 but they define rigor as going deeper into grade level content. Others would define rigor based on the content covered. By that latter metric, rigor has not been raised for all. Formerly advanced math kids now have to rely on extensions in a heterogenous class to get content that would otherwise have been covered in their base advanced math class prior to E3. Depending on how often extensions are provided, formerly advanced math kids could have less rigor (as measured by content covered) under E3. It is hard for teachers to differentiate in heterogenous classes; extensions are not as reliable as having a class with peers learning the same advanced material.
Thanks. That is what I thought they were doing.
This seems to be another anti-merit, “equity” initiative, like the one described here:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113951.page
How are extensions anti-merit? Shouldn't the "merit" kids be able to handle them?
It's not clear whether these extensions are grade level or advanced content. If the former, kids would lose access to advanced content altogether. FCPS needs to share details on how E3 works as well as its implications for the accelerated math pathway.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rolling Valley is piloting E3 this school year (22-23). I have a 4th grader who was designated at an advanced math student (level III AAP but additionally qualified for advanced math), but now instead of doing the combined 4th and 5th curriculum in a group with a designated teacher (our old model), they receive extensions to the lesson the entire class gets during class "when needed". We have not been told what will happen in 5th grade as far as whether they'll get the 6th grade content and take the 6th grade SOL.
Is the entire class able to master the advanced math they now try to teach?
In my own teaching experience, children of the same age learn at different rates and abilities.
Based on what another PP said, it sounds like they are teaching the entire class grade level content, with advanced math content being offered as extensions as needed. FCPS argues that rigor is raised for all students with E3 but they define rigor as going deeper into grade level content. Others would define rigor based on the content covered. By that latter metric, rigor has not been raised for all. Formerly advanced math kids now have to rely on extensions in a heterogenous class to get content that would otherwise have been covered in their base advanced math class prior to E3. Depending on how often extensions are provided, formerly advanced math kids could have less rigor (as measured by content covered) under E3. It is hard for teachers to differentiate in heterogenous classes; extensions are not as reliable as having a class with peers learning the same advanced material.
Thanks. That is what I thought they were doing.
This seems to be another anti-merit, “equity” initiative, like the one described here:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113951.page
How are extensions anti-merit? Shouldn't the "merit" kids be able to handle them?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rolling Valley is piloting E3 this school year (22-23). I have a 4th grader who was designated at an advanced math student (level III AAP but additionally qualified for advanced math), but now instead of doing the combined 4th and 5th curriculum in a group with a designated teacher (our old model), they receive extensions to the lesson the entire class gets during class "when needed". We have not been told what will happen in 5th grade as far as whether they'll get the 6th grade content and take the 6th grade SOL.
Is the entire class able to master the advanced math they now try to teach?
In my own teaching experience, children of the same age learn at different rates and abilities.
Based on what another PP said, it sounds like they are teaching the entire class grade level content, with advanced math content being offered as extensions as needed. FCPS argues that rigor is raised for all students with E3 but they define rigor as going deeper into grade level content. Others would define rigor based on the content covered. By that latter metric, rigor has not been raised for all. Formerly advanced math kids now have to rely on extensions in a heterogenous class to get content that would otherwise have been covered in their base advanced math class prior to E3. Depending on how often extensions are provided, formerly advanced math kids could have less rigor (as measured by content covered) under E3. It is hard for teachers to differentiate in heterogenous classes; extensions are not as reliable as having a class with peers learning the same advanced material.
Thanks. That is what I thought they were doing.
This seems to be another anti-merit, “equity” initiative, like the one described here:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113951.page
How are extensions anti-merit? Shouldn't the "merit" kids be able to handle them?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rolling Valley is piloting E3 this school year (22-23). I have a 4th grader who was designated at an advanced math student (level III AAP but additionally qualified for advanced math), but now instead of doing the combined 4th and 5th curriculum in a group with a designated teacher (our old model), they receive extensions to the lesson the entire class gets during class "when needed". We have not been told what will happen in 5th grade as far as whether they'll get the 6th grade content and take the 6th grade SOL.
Is the entire class able to master the advanced math they now try to teach?
In my own teaching experience, children of the same age learn at different rates and abilities.
Based on what another PP said, it sounds like they are teaching the entire class grade level content, with advanced math content being offered as extensions as needed. FCPS argues that rigor is raised for all students with E3 but they define rigor as going deeper into grade level content. Others would define rigor based on the content covered. By that latter metric, rigor has not been raised for all. Formerly advanced math kids now have to rely on extensions in a heterogenous class to get content that would otherwise have been covered in their base advanced math class prior to E3. Depending on how often extensions are provided, formerly advanced math kids could have less rigor (as measured by content covered) under E3. It is hard for teachers to differentiate in heterogenous classes; extensions are not as reliable as having a class with peers learning the same advanced material.
Thanks. That is what I thought they were doing.
This seems to be another anti-merit, “equity” initiative, like the one described here:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113951.page
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Rolling Valley is piloting E3 this school year (22-23). I have a 4th grader who was designated at an advanced math student (level III AAP but additionally qualified for advanced math), but now instead of doing the combined 4th and 5th curriculum in a group with a designated teacher (our old model), they receive extensions to the lesson the entire class gets during class "when needed". We have not been told what will happen in 5th grade as far as whether they'll get the 6th grade content and take the 6th grade SOL.
Is the entire class able to master the advanced math they now try to teach?
In my own teaching experience, children of the same age learn at different rates and abilities.
Based on what another PP said, it sounds like they are teaching the entire class grade level content, with advanced math content being offered as extensions as needed. FCPS argues that rigor is raised for all students with E3 but they define rigor as going deeper into grade level content. Others would define rigor based on the content covered. By that latter metric, rigor has not been raised for all. Formerly advanced math kids now have to rely on extensions in a heterogenous class to get content that would otherwise have been covered in their base advanced math class prior to E3. Depending on how often extensions are provided, formerly advanced math kids could have less rigor (as measured by content covered) under E3. It is hard for teachers to differentiate in heterogenous classes; extensions are not as reliable as having a class with peers learning the same advanced material.
Thanks. That is what I thought they were doing.
This seems to be another anti-merit, “equity” initiative, like the one described here:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1113951.page