Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does this math pathway change mean for the old advice that said you should strive to have your kid taking Algebra 1 by 8th grade.

I have a 7th grader so I’m inclined to not push for algebra 1 next year, since by 9th grade she’ll be in the next integrated math class?

What class is your 7th grader in this year? AMP7+? I am not sure you would have an option not to have her take A1 next year. And personally, I would not want to be in year 1 of the integrated math rollout. It's going to be rough. I'd therefore push to have my kid take A1 next year if I were you, OP.

Anonymous wrote:So kids are just supposed to do Khan Academy if they want to be prepared for Calc?

Anonymous wrote:What does this math pathway change mean for the old advice that said you should strive to have your kid taking Algebra 1 by 8th grade.

I have a 7th grader so I’m inclined to not push for algebra 1 next year, since by 9th grade she’ll be in the next integrated math class?

Anonymous wrote:So kids are just supposed to do Khan Academy if they want to be prepared for Calc?

Anonymous wrote:They had a webinar about this last month. You can find the recording and slides here:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/math/es/

Geometry will be moved into the Integrated Algebra 1&2 courses, but not all of it. Some will be added to Math 8, some to the precalc, and some not taught at all. Trig functions will be moved to precalc. You can see in the slides the future course progression. There is no mention of an 2 year precalc sequence. Everything is moved up a year.

They also went over the changes to elementary math, and there were a lot more changes than I expected, with most of it starting next school year. What they are teaching isn't changing much, except maybe the sequencing. They are reducing or eliminating tracking but implementing automatic acceleration based on MCAP scores in grades 3-6. Not sure how that will work out. They talked about "purposely and regularly regrouping students" in grades 2-5.

The state still hasn't issued guidance on acceleration or student support so I think they are waiting for that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the thinking is that a lot of high schoolers don't need geometry, so it's eliminated as a requirement... but it's not going to be offered to kids who do need it as a pre-req to trig/calc/physics?

Geometry is not being "eliminated" per se, it's being integrated into the two algebra courses, supposedly.

I understand your skepticism on how they can do that and maintain a meaningful understanding and learning of geometry that is equal to what they would have gotten with it as a standalone class, but that is what they're purporting to do....

Yeah, I understand smushing 3 years into 2 for elementary math, but don't think it's a good idea later on here.

They are not accelerating -- covering 3 years in 2. They are eliminating standards. That means students miss content.

They’re watering down the graduation requirements.

What? Which parts do they skip?

Geometry content.

What is the major effects for missing to learn geometry content to an average adult? I am just curious about it. I am not from here, what is included in geometry content curriculum?

SAT and ACT tests' content? Do the tests have geometry questions? And geometry isn't going away, it's being "integrated" (whatever that actually means) into A1 and A2. Right now geometry is the course offered between Alg 1 and Alg 2 in MS or high school

Geometry is being reduced to fit the new course pathway in 2 years instead of 3.

Will Geometry actually include writing proofs? It was shocking for me that my kids never did that. It was the whole class for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure I would trust at this point what a middle school is saying about what math courses they think high schools will be offering 9th graders in 2029-2030. I mean, thanks for sharing, it's useful to know that that's what Cabin John is telling folks, but I would not take that as any kind of clear indication that MCPS high schools will definitely be doing one year of pre-calculus in 9th and then send the kids on to calculus in 10th.

I agree with this. I imagine they would create a two-year precalc sequence to ensure that kids are ready for calc.

But where would they get that 2 year precalc curriculum?

The curriculum that exists is the 3 year Integrated Math curriculum that MCPS is not using.

Will MCPS adopt a 2 years accelerated honors version of 3 year IM? Probably not, because evil “tracking”.
And what about the kids who want honors but the traditional 3 year pace?

Last time MCPS tried to make its own curriculum with Curriculum 2.0, it was disaster.
And they haven’t even started talking about doing this, anyway.

And people didn’t like the AMP 7+ curriculum when they ended AIM and skipped kids from CM 4/5/6 to 7+

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the thinking is that a lot of high schoolers don't need geometry, so it's eliminated as a requirement... but it's not going to be offered to kids who do need it as a pre-req to trig/calc/physics?

Geometry is not being "eliminated" per se, it's being integrated into the two algebra courses, supposedly.

I understand your skepticism on how they can do that and maintain a meaningful understanding and learning of geometry that is equal to what they would have gotten with it as a standalone class, but that is what they're purporting to do....

Yeah, I understand smushing 3 years into 2 for elementary math, but don't think it's a good idea later on here.

They are not accelerating -- covering 3 years in 2. They are eliminating standards. That means students miss content.

They’re watering down the graduation requirements.

What? Which parts do they skip?

Geometry content.

What is the major effects for missing to learn geometry content to an average adult? I am just curious about it. I am not from here, what is included in geometry content curriculum?

SAT and ACT tests' content? Do the tests have geometry questions? And geometry isn't going away, it's being "integrated" (whatever that actually means) into A1 and A2. Right now geometry is the course offered between Alg 1 and Alg 2 in MS or high school

Geometry is being reduced to fit the new course pathway in 2 years instead of 3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure I would trust at this point what a middle school is saying about what math courses they think high schools will be offering 9th graders in 2029-2030. I mean, thanks for sharing, it's useful to know that that's what Cabin John is telling folks, but I would not take that as any kind of clear indication that MCPS high schools will definitely be doing one year of pre-calculus in 9th and then send the kids on to calculus in 10th.

I agree with this. I imagine they would create a two-year precalc sequence to ensure that kids are ready for calc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the thinking is that a lot of high schoolers don't need geometry, so it's eliminated as a requirement... but it's not going to be offered to kids who do need it as a pre-req to trig/calc/physics?

Geometry is not being "eliminated" per se, it's being integrated into the two algebra courses, supposedly.

I understand your skepticism on how they can do that and maintain a meaningful understanding and learning of geometry that is equal to what they would have gotten with it as a standalone class, but that is what they're purporting to do....

Yeah, I understand smushing 3 years into 2 for elementary math, but don't think it's a good idea later on here.

They are not accelerating -- covering 3 years in 2. They are eliminating standards. That means students miss content.

They’re watering down the graduation requirements.

What? Which parts do they skip?

Geometry content.

What is the major effects for missing to learn geometry content to an average adult? I am just curious about it. I am not from here, what is included in geometry content curriculum?

SAT and ACT tests' content? Do the tests have geometry questions? And geometry isn't going away, it's being "integrated" (whatever that actually means) into A1 and A2. Right now geometry is the course offered between Alg 1 and Alg 2 in MS or high school

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the thinking is that a lot of high schoolers don't need geometry, so it's eliminated as a requirement... but it's not going to be offered to kids who do need it as a pre-req to trig/calc/physics?

Geometry is not being "eliminated" per se, it's being integrated into the two algebra courses, supposedly.

I understand your skepticism on how they can do that and maintain a meaningful understanding and learning of geometry that is equal to what they would have gotten with it as a standalone class, but that is what they're purporting to do....

Yeah, I understand smushing 3 years into 2 for elementary math, but don't think it's a good idea later on here.

They are not accelerating -- covering 3 years in 2. They are eliminating standards. That means students miss content.

They’re watering down the graduation requirements.

What? Which parts do they skip?

Geometry content.

What is the major effects for missing to learn geometry content to an average adult? I am just curious about it. I am not from here, what is included in geometry content curriculum?