I just hope the gaps continue to increase as equity efforts fall to the wayside. We should celebrate and foster the acceleration and achievements of our brightest.

I’m also glad my kids were able to take advantage of accelerated math and wonderful AAP centers provided by FCPS. Truly a great program if you are in the right centers.

It’s only a race to nowhere when your losing the race, while many are just out here getting an education and didn’t even know there was a competition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid will take AP Lang, AP Lit, AP Seminar, and AP research. They also will have AP Government, AP European history, and AP USH. I’m not seeing a problem with doing multivariable also.

PP who wants to set up math tracks seems to think that kids who are perfectly capable of doing matrix multiplication (and mind you, matrix math underlies both modern communications and large language models aka AI) in high school should be stuck doing algebra based physics extensions because...reasons. PP has yet to answer the question "why limit acceleration."

Because the increasing levels of acceleration are creating a toxic environment that doesn't provide a significant benefit for the vast majority of kids.

It's a race to nowhere. There is very little value in accelerating beyond a year (or two on a limited basis).

I think some people have a hard time accepting that there are always going to be smarter kids and more nurturing families. And it is a social issue for them, not an educational one.

Acceleration isn’t meant to benefit the vast majority of kids. Acceleration is meant to benefit those who need it and currently it’s about 10-15% of kids.

Algebra in 7th is such a low bar too.

Education isnt a race to nowhere; it’s an endless journey, but some just walk faster.

Some acceleration is great. Having some calculus in HS is helpful.

10-15% is too large of a cohort for exceptionally gifted. It will include many bright kids who would have been just fine with algebra in 8th.

Limit the hyper acceleration to the truly gifted kids. There should be a very high bar for entry.

The unnecessary over-acceleration is the race to nowhere.

Kids don’t need to be exceptionally gifted to handle algebra in 7th. The exceptionally gifted kids are taking algebra in 4th or even earlier.

Overaccelerating kids can be bad. But holding kids back and turning math into a tedious slog is also bad. The right track for a kid depends on the kid’s natural aptitude, interest, and personality. That’s best decided by the kids, parents, and teachers, rather than some internet rando who just doesn’t like math acceleration.

"To handle algebra." There is the mindset that we should push as fast as possible, even without any real benefit, just to see what they can "handle". Race to nowhere.

For truly gifted kids (not 10-15%), offering extra acceleration makes sense. Have a high bar of entry and provide this for the kids who actually need it.

For the rest of the "gifted" kids, one year of calculus in HS will serve them just fine.

OP listed several potential benefits right in the initial post.

As I've said multiple times, one year of calculus in HS would be good to prepare kids for college.

Looks good for college applications? That is the root of the arms race that is driving unnecessary acceleration.

There it is, the root of your obstinate opinion. You are concerned your child won't be able to compete on the college application because they aren't as advanced in math. I'm sure you'll happily point out other ways they were allowed to stand out though. Hypocrite.
So many kids easily ace Algebra in 7th grade. It is not two years advanced. And even if it were, they are getting A's and not struggling. There is no reason not to allow them to take those classes. It is not a "road to nowhere." That means nothing. Come up with actual arguments why it's bad or stop reposting the same dumb opinion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Algebra 1 in 6th, Geometry in 7th, and Algebra in 8th, is gen-ed standard in most third world countries. What seems to be the problem here in FCPS? Let's blame it on pandemic, to cover up the underlying challenges that existed well before that.

"The 2022 National Assessment of Educational Progress found that, post-pandemic, 38 percent of 8th graders couldn’t meet the test’s lowest benchmark. In practice, that means that many of these students have trouble using division, for example, or plotting a point on a number line.

Experts have debated why, and though there’s little consensus on the reasons, some of the commonly cited ones include the rise of smartphones, changes in standards in the mid-2010s, ..."

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/sharp-steep-declines-u-s-students-are-falling-behind-in-math-and-science/2024/12

I'm not the PP arguing for limiting acceleration, but please prove the bolded. Just because 8th graders are failing NAEP doesn't mean the bolded, it just means we aren't teaching 8th grader's math.

Prove to who, and why? NAEP report is public and widely accepted. US is falling behind with middle schoolers spending time on tiktok and insta since math being taught is mediocre and boring.

Provide data showing that taking Algebra 1 in 6th grade (!) is a standard, general education track in "most third world countries" as stated above.

NAEP data doesn't prove that.

I'm from a 3rd world country where the national education standard required all students be taught calculus topics by 12th grade. The math pathway is structured a bit differently there.

Starting in 6th grade, students are introduced to algebra, geometry, and probability as core strands, and these subjects continue in parallel through 9th grade. Trigonometry is typically introduced in 9th grade, followed by multiple strands of precalculus in 10th. By 11th and 12th grade, students continue with more advanced topics across the strands—such as Algebra 2, precalculus, probability and statistics, and finally, calculus.

Not everyone gets all of math, so the bottom portion of the class graduates with just a D in math, but the top 30 to 40% get a distinction grade ( B- to A+) in math. In short, students are not given a choice to give up math learning early, everyone is required to sit in the same advanced math class.

Which country?

They do blended math? Interesting.

12 grade math syllabus - national standard in India

https://www.vedantu.com/syllabus/cbse-class-12-maths-syllabus

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Algebra 1 in 6th, Geometry in 7th, and Algebra in 8th, is gen-ed standard in most third world countries. What seems to be the problem here in FCPS? Let's blame it on pandemic, to cover up the underlying challenges that existed well before that.

"The 2022 National Assessment of Educational Progress found that, post-pandemic, 38 percent of 8th graders couldn’t meet the test’s lowest benchmark. In practice, that means that many of these students have trouble using division, for example, or plotting a point on a number line.

Experts have debated why, and though there’s little consensus on the reasons, some of the commonly cited ones include the rise of smartphones, changes in standards in the mid-2010s, ..."

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/sharp-steep-declines-u-s-students-are-falling-behind-in-math-and-science/2024/12

I'm not the PP arguing for limiting acceleration, but please prove the bolded. Just because 8th graders are failing NAEP doesn't mean the bolded, it just means we aren't teaching 8th grader's math.

Prove to who, and why? NAEP report is public and widely accepted. US is falling behind with middle schoolers spending time on tiktok and insta since math being taught is mediocre and boring.

Provide data showing that taking Algebra 1 in 6th grade (!) is a standard, general education track in "most third world countries" as stated above.

NAEP data doesn't prove that.

I'm from a 3rd world country where the national education standard required all students be taught calculus topics by 12th grade. The math pathway is structured a bit differently there.

Starting in 6th grade, students are introduced to algebra, geometry, and probability as core strands, and these subjects continue in parallel through 9th grade. Trigonometry is typically introduced in 9th grade, followed by multiple strands of precalculus in 10th. By 11th and 12th grade, students continue with more advanced topics across the strands—such as Algebra 2, precalculus, probability and statistics, and finally, calculus.

Not everyone gets all of math, so the bottom portion of the class graduates with just a D in math, but the top 30 to 40% get a distinction grade ( B- to A+) in math. In short, students are not given a choice to give up math learning early, everyone is required to sit in the same advanced math class.

Which country?

They do blended math? Interesting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid will take AP Lang, AP Lit, AP Seminar, and AP research. They also will have AP Government, AP European history, and AP USH. I’m not seeing a problem with doing multivariable also.

PP who wants to set up math tracks seems to think that kids who are perfectly capable of doing matrix multiplication (and mind you, matrix math underlies both modern communications and large language models aka AI) in high school should be stuck doing algebra based physics extensions because...reasons. PP has yet to answer the question "why limit acceleration."

Because the increasing levels of acceleration are creating a toxic environment that doesn't provide a significant benefit for the vast majority of kids.

It's a race to nowhere. There is very little value in accelerating beyond a year (or two on a limited basis).

I think some people have a hard time accepting that there are always going to be smarter kids and more nurturing families. And it is a social issue for them, not an educational one.

Acceleration isn’t meant to benefit the vast majority of kids. Acceleration is meant to benefit those who need it and currently it’s about 10-15% of kids.

Algebra in 7th is such a low bar too.

Education isnt a race to nowhere; it’s an endless journey, but some just walk faster.

Some acceleration is great. Having some calculus in HS is helpful.

10-15% is too large of a cohort for exceptionally gifted. It will include many bright kids who would have been just fine with algebra in 8th.

Limit the hyper acceleration to the truly gifted kids. There should be a very high bar for entry.

The unnecessary over-acceleration is the race to nowhere.

Kids don’t need to be exceptionally gifted to handle algebra in 7th. The exceptionally gifted kids are taking algebra in 4th or even earlier.

Overaccelerating kids can be bad. But holding kids back and turning math into a tedious slog is also bad. The right track for a kid depends on the kid’s natural aptitude, interest, and personality. That’s best decided by the kids, parents, and teachers, rather than some internet rando who just doesn’t like math acceleration.

"To handle algebra." There is the mindset that we should push as fast as possible, even without any real benefit, just to see what they can "handle". Race to nowhere.

For truly gifted kids (not 10-15%), offering extra acceleration makes sense. Have a high bar of entry and provide this for the kids who actually need it.

For the rest of the "gifted" kids, one year of calculus in HS will serve them just fine.

OP listed several potential benefits right in the initial post.

As I've said multiple times, one year of calculus in HS would be good to prepare kids for college.

Looks good for college applications? That is the root of the arms race that is driving unnecessary acceleration.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Algebra 1 in 6th, Geometry in 7th, and Algebra in 8th, is gen-ed standard in most third world countries. What seems to be the problem here in FCPS? Let's blame it on pandemic, to cover up the underlying challenges that existed well before that.

"The 2022 National Assessment of Educational Progress found that, post-pandemic, 38 percent of 8th graders couldn’t meet the test’s lowest benchmark. In practice, that means that many of these students have trouble using division, for example, or plotting a point on a number line.

Experts have debated why, and though there’s little consensus on the reasons, some of the commonly cited ones include the rise of smartphones, changes in standards in the mid-2010s, ..."

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/sharp-steep-declines-u-s-students-are-falling-behind-in-math-and-science/2024/12

I'm not the PP arguing for limiting acceleration, but please prove the bolded. Just because 8th graders are failing NAEP doesn't mean the bolded, it just means we aren't teaching 8th grader's math.

Prove to who, and why? NAEP report is public and widely accepted. US is falling behind with middle schoolers spending time on tiktok and insta since math being taught is mediocre and boring.

Provide data showing that taking Algebra 1 in 6th grade (!) is a standard, general education track in "most third world countries" as stated above.

NAEP data doesn't prove that.

I'm from a 3rd world country where the national education standard required all students be taught calculus topics by 12th grade. The math pathway is structured a bit differently there.

Starting in 6th grade, students are introduced to algebra, geometry, and probability as core strands, and these subjects continue in parallel through 9th grade. Trigonometry is typically introduced in 9th grade, followed by multiple strands of precalculus in 10th. By 11th and 12th grade, students continue with more advanced topics across the strands—such as Algebra 2, precalculus, probability and statistics, and finally, calculus.

Not everyone gets all of math, so the bottom portion of the class graduates with just a D in math, but the top 30 to 40% get a distinction grade ( B- to A+) in math. In short, students are not given a choice to give up math learning early, everyone is required to sit in the same advanced math class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid will take AP Lang, AP Lit, AP Seminar, and AP research. They also will have AP Government, AP European history, and AP USH. I’m not seeing a problem with doing multivariable also.

PP who wants to set up math tracks seems to think that kids who are perfectly capable of doing matrix multiplication (and mind you, matrix math underlies both modern communications and large language models aka AI) in high school should be stuck doing algebra based physics extensions because...reasons. PP has yet to answer the question "why limit acceleration."

Because the increasing levels of acceleration are creating a toxic environment that doesn't provide a significant benefit for the vast majority of kids.

It's a race to nowhere. There is very little value in accelerating beyond a year (or two on a limited basis).

I think some people have a hard time accepting that there are always going to be smarter kids and more nurturing families. And it is a social issue for them, not an educational one.

Acceleration isn’t meant to benefit the vast majority of kids. Acceleration is meant to benefit those who need it and currently it’s about 10-15% of kids.

Algebra in 7th is such a low bar too.

Education isnt a race to nowhere; it’s an endless journey, but some just walk faster.

Some acceleration is great. Having some calculus in HS is helpful.

10-15% is too large of a cohort for exceptionally gifted. It will include many bright kids who would have been just fine with algebra in 8th.

Limit the hyper acceleration to the truly gifted kids. There should be a very high bar for entry.

The unnecessary over-acceleration is the race to nowhere.

Kids don’t need to be exceptionally gifted to handle algebra in 7th. The exceptionally gifted kids are taking algebra in 4th or even earlier.

Overaccelerating kids can be bad. But holding kids back and turning math into a tedious slog is also bad. The right track for a kid depends on the kid’s natural aptitude, interest, and personality. That’s best decided by the kids, parents, and teachers, rather than some internet rando who just doesn’t like math acceleration.

"To handle algebra." There is the mindset that we should push as fast as possible, even without any real benefit, just to see what they can "handle". Race to nowhere.

For truly gifted kids (not 10-15%), offering extra acceleration makes sense. Have a high bar of entry and provide this for the kids who actually need it.

For the rest of the "gifted" kids, one year of calculus in HS will serve them just fine.

OP listed several potential benefits right in the initial post.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid will take AP Lang, AP Lit, AP Seminar, and AP research. They also will have AP Government, AP European history, and AP USH. I’m not seeing a problem with doing multivariable also.

PP who wants to set up math tracks seems to think that kids who are perfectly capable of doing matrix multiplication (and mind you, matrix math underlies both modern communications and large language models aka AI) in high school should be stuck doing algebra based physics extensions because...reasons. PP has yet to answer the question "why limit acceleration."

Because the increasing levels of acceleration are creating a toxic environment that doesn't provide a significant benefit for the vast majority of kids.

It's a race to nowhere. There is very little value in accelerating beyond a year (or two on a limited basis).

How does placing kids in classes that meet their academic needs create a toxic environment? Are there parents who seem to think that if their kid isn't in the top group that their kid is being slighted? Sure, but I suspect those parents exist regardless of what the tracking looks like at school. Are there kids who see it as failing because they are not in the top group? Sure, but again, I think that has always existed.

My kid has been bored in math since he started ES. Algebra 1 in 7th grade has not been boring but has not been challenging either. I think the additional work in class and the increased pace made the class more interesting, but the class has not pushed him. I doubt Geometry is going to challenge him next year. I am not sure when math in school is going to push him. Right now, he finds himself challenged in his math competition program and he keeps asking to do that, so we will keep that going.

DC has been in exact same situation as yours, so counselor approved them for summer Geometry, and now enrolled in 8th grade Algebra 2, also approved by counselor. It would have been ideal if DC was approved for Algebra 1 in 6th, and that would have avoided the need for summer geometry. But, oh well!

Ridiculous

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid will take AP Lang, AP Lit, AP Seminar, and AP research. They also will have AP Government, AP European history, and AP USH. I’m not seeing a problem with doing multivariable also.

PP who wants to set up math tracks seems to think that kids who are perfectly capable of doing matrix multiplication (and mind you, matrix math underlies both modern communications and large language models aka AI) in high school should be stuck doing algebra based physics extensions because...reasons. PP has yet to answer the question "why limit acceleration."

Because the increasing levels of acceleration are creating a toxic environment that doesn't provide a significant benefit for the vast majority of kids.

It's a race to nowhere. There is very little value in accelerating beyond a year (or two on a limited basis).

I think some people have a hard time accepting that there are always going to be smarter kids and more nurturing families. And it is a social issue for them, not an educational one.

Acceleration isn’t meant to benefit the vast majority of kids. Acceleration is meant to benefit those who need it and currently it’s about 10-15% of kids.

Algebra in 7th is such a low bar too.

Education isnt a race to nowhere; it’s an endless journey, but some just walk faster.

Some acceleration is great. Having some calculus in HS is helpful.

10-15% is too large of a cohort for exceptionally gifted. It will include many bright kids who would have been just fine with algebra in 8th.

Limit the hyper acceleration to the truly gifted kids. There should be a very high bar for entry.

The unnecessary over-acceleration is the race to nowhere.

Kids don’t need to be exceptionally gifted to handle algebra in 7th. The exceptionally gifted kids are taking algebra in 4th or even earlier.

Overaccelerating kids can be bad. But holding kids back and turning math into a tedious slog is also bad. The right track for a kid depends on the kid’s natural aptitude, interest, and personality. That’s best decided by the kids, parents, and teachers, rather than some internet rando who just doesn’t like math acceleration.

"To handle algebra." There is the mindset that we should push as fast as possible, even without any real benefit, just to see what they can "handle". Race to nowhere.

For truly gifted kids (not 10-15%), offering extra acceleration makes sense. Have a high bar of entry and provide this for the kids who actually need it.

For the rest of the "gifted" kids, one year of calculus in HS will serve them just fine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I'm taking crazy pills and I'm not sure if I'm just caught up in the Northern Virginia mindset.

Our child scored well on both the Iowa and the SOL and their teacher recommends they take out for one next year in seventh grade. I'm sitting here wondering why?

I completely understand why it's beneficial for some maybe even the majority of kids to take calculus in their senior year. But how many kids are really going to benefit from taking 2 years of calculus?

So I guess my question is what's the point? Aside for taking an extra year of college math in high school, why do it?

So far I come up with it. Might look better on college applications, make college classes either easier or something you can get credit for while in HS.

I have this underlying fear that they are going to push anyone who scores well into algebra 1, so there are less kids in 7th grade honors. That allows for smaller classes and helps with the goal of Algebra for all by grade 8

Yes, it’s the race to no where. Many students take Calculus 1 at universities—it’s still taught there.

+1

IMO, anything beyond 1 year of acceleration (AKA algebra in 8th) should have a high bar of entry.

It did. You used to ahve to pass the SOL advanced and be in the 91st percentile on the IAAT to be considered for Algebra in 7th grade. This year they lowered the bar to passing advanced on the SOL only. That said, that still leaves a little more than 2,100 students eligible for Algebra in 7th grade, based on the last three school years SOL results. That is under half of the kids taking Advanced Math or in AAP. So about 10% of the 7th grade class is eligible to take Algebra. Given that the kids who do take Algebra in 7th grade all pass the SOL with a high percentage passing advanced, I would say that they have found a reasonable bar for entry.

Still way too many kids. It should be extremely rare. Or not offered at all.

Why are you so invested in holding back other people’s kids? So many kids thrive on the calculus in 11th or even in 20th grade path.

I’m not “invested”; we are all just throwing out opinions here.

Children would benefit from cutting off the arms race of math acceleration. Pick a reasonable amount of math to take before college and offer that. Otherwise we end up with the race to nowhere.

I’d say 1 year of calculus in HS is a good breaking point. Maybe 2 for truly exceptional kids.

Would children benefit from having their reading materials restricted to 2 years above grade level? If not, then why restrict math advancement? Why is math an “arms race,” when no one views English, music, and sports advancement as problematic?

One of my kids took AP Calc BC in 11th. One took it in 9th. Neither had any problems. Both were in exactly the correct level for them. Why should my kids be bored for a year or more just to make other kids look better?

Kids aren’t accelerating in English, science, etc by 2+ years.

Of course they are. AP Lang and Lit. AP Chem, Physics, and Bio.

So one year of "acceleration". That's reasonable.

Sure, people like you who can't count to 2 probably shouldn't look accelerate in math.

No need to be an obtuse twat. I've taken more math than most people here.

Anonymous wrote:My kid did the accelerated route and is opting to take statistics instead of calculus and then no math senior year. They are leaning towards taking a new language.

So no real benefit from over-accelerating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid will take AP Lang, AP Lit, AP Seminar, and AP research. They also will have AP Government, AP European history, and AP USH. I’m not seeing a problem with doing multivariable also.

PP who wants to set up math tracks seems to think that kids who are perfectly capable of doing matrix multiplication (and mind you, matrix math underlies both modern communications and large language models aka AI) in high school should be stuck doing algebra based physics extensions because...reasons. PP has yet to answer the question "why limit acceleration."

Because the increasing levels of acceleration are creating a toxic environment that doesn't provide a significant benefit for the vast majority of kids.

It's a race to nowhere. There is very little value in accelerating beyond a year (or two on a limited basis).

How does placing kids in classes that meet their academic needs create a toxic environment? Are there parents who seem to think that if their kid isn't in the top group that their kid is being slighted? Sure, but I suspect those parents exist regardless of what the tracking looks like at school. Are there kids who see it as failing because they are not in the top group? Sure, but again, I think that has always existed.

My kid has been bored in math since he started ES. Algebra 1 in 7th grade has not been boring but has not been challenging either. I think the additional work in class and the increased pace made the class more interesting, but the class has not pushed him. I doubt Geometry is going to challenge him next year. I am not sure when math in school is going to push him. Right now, he finds himself challenged in his math competition program and he keeps asking to do that, so we will keep that going.

DC has been in exact same situation as yours, so counselor approved them for summer Geometry, and now enrolled in 8th grade Algebra 2, also approved by counselor. It would have been ideal if DC was approved for Algebra 1 in 6th, and that would have avoided the need for summer geometry. But, oh well!

I agree, let the advanced students learn math at their individual comfortable pace, finishing up high school with both Calculus III Multivariable as well as AP Statistics. If this appears accelerated to equity proponents, so be it, it's just terminology. There is a ton of math waiting to be learnt in college beyond Calculus III and AP statistics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I'm taking crazy pills and I'm not sure if I'm just caught up in the Northern Virginia mindset.

Our child scored well on both the Iowa and the SOL and their teacher recommends they take out for one next year in seventh grade. I'm sitting here wondering why?

I completely understand why it's beneficial for some maybe even the majority of kids to take calculus in their senior year. But how many kids are really going to benefit from taking 2 years of calculus?

So I guess my question is what's the point? Aside for taking an extra year of college math in high school, why do it?

So far I come up with it. Might look better on college applications, make college classes either easier or something you can get credit for while in HS.

I have this underlying fear that they are going to push anyone who scores well into algebra 1, so there are less kids in 7th grade honors. That allows for smaller classes and helps with the goal of Algebra for all by grade 8

Yes, it’s the race to no where. Many students take Calculus 1 at universities—it’s still taught there.

+1

IMO, anything beyond 1 year of acceleration (AKA algebra in 8th) should have a high bar of entry.

It did. You used to ahve to pass the SOL advanced and be in the 91st percentile on the IAAT to be considered for Algebra in 7th grade. This year they lowered the bar to passing advanced on the SOL only. That said, that still leaves a little more than 2,100 students eligible for Algebra in 7th grade, based on the last three school years SOL results. That is under half of the kids taking Advanced Math or in AAP. So about 10% of the 7th grade class is eligible to take Algebra. Given that the kids who do take Algebra in 7th grade all pass the SOL with a high percentage passing advanced, I would say that they have found a reasonable bar for entry.

Still way too many kids. It should be extremely rare. Or not offered at all.

Why are you so invested in holding back other people’s kids? So many kids thrive on the calculus in 11th or even in 20th grade path.

I’m not “invested”; we are all just throwing out opinions here.

Children would benefit from cutting off the arms race of math acceleration. Pick a reasonable amount of math to take before college and offer that. Otherwise we end up with the race to nowhere.

I’d say 1 year of calculus in HS is a good breaking point. Maybe 2 for truly exceptional kids.

Would children benefit from having their reading materials restricted to 2 years above grade level? If not, then why restrict math advancement? Why is math an “arms race,” when no one views English, music, and sports advancement as problematic?

One of my kids took AP Calc BC in 11th. One took it in 9th. Neither had any problems. Both were in exactly the correct level for them. Why should my kids be bored for a year or more just to make other kids look better?

Kids aren’t accelerating in English, science, etc by 2+ years.

Of course they are. AP Lang and Lit. AP Chem, Physics, and Bio.

So one year of "acceleration". That's reasonable.

AP classes are supposed to be intro level College classes, that is more than one year of acceleration. And there are multiple AP classes in each field, meaning that many kids are knocking out freshman year of college while in HS. What is the difference between a kid taking AP US History and AP world History and a kid taking AP Calc BS and Multivariate Calculus? Both are college level math classes, one is taught as DE.

Kids take AP World History instead of regular HS-level world history. They aren't really jumping ahead at all; they are swapping out one class for more advanced material.

Some amount of acceleration is great, but it has turned into a race to nowhere. Kids are racing through material without deep understanding. We should push for more challenging content and offer more enrichment activities instead of racing through concepts. Deeper instead of faster.

More advanced material is the definition of jumping ahead.

Taking AP World History isn't jumping ahead in course scheduling. HSs aren't offering increasingly accelerated history classes.

9th graders can take AP Human Geo, how is that not a 9th grader taking a class 4 years ahead? 9th graders can also take AP Computer Science A, how is that not a 9th grader taking a class 4 years ahead?

Because those are overpriced high school classes, not university level classes.

I taught at three different Universities, AP classes are not that much different then an Intro class in the Social Sciences. I won't pretend I have a clue about the hard sciences because I did not take any of those in college. The English Lit class I took as a freshman included a series of books and short stories I had read in my HS AP English class. I remember my professor passing out "A Modest Proposal" to the class and sitting back to watch my classmates' reactions as they read it. My Prof asked me when I read it and I told him the two different classes I had read it in HS. No one else in teh class had read it before. It was fun to watch. I was even more surprised that most of the class had never read The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.

My point? AP classes, when properly taught, are the equivalent of an Intro class at most colleges. Kids should be accelerated when it is appropriate for where they are in their education. Not stopped because some people think that one Calculus class is fine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid will take AP Lang, AP Lit, AP Seminar, and AP research. They also will have AP Government, AP European history, and AP USH. I’m not seeing a problem with doing multivariable also.

PP who wants to set up math tracks seems to think that kids who are perfectly capable of doing matrix multiplication (and mind you, matrix math underlies both modern communications and large language models aka AI) in high school should be stuck doing algebra based physics extensions because...reasons. PP has yet to answer the question "why limit acceleration."

Because the increasing levels of acceleration are creating a toxic environment that doesn't provide a significant benefit for the vast majority of kids.

It's a race to nowhere. There is very little value in accelerating beyond a year (or two on a limited basis).

How does placing kids in classes that meet their academic needs create a toxic environment? Are there parents who seem to think that if their kid isn't in the top group that their kid is being slighted? Sure, but I suspect those parents exist regardless of what the tracking looks like at school. Are there kids who see it as failing because they are not in the top group? Sure, but again, I think that has always existed.

My kid has been bored in math since he started ES. Algebra 1 in 7th grade has not been boring but has not been challenging either. I think the additional work in class and the increased pace made the class more interesting, but the class has not pushed him. I doubt Geometry is going to challenge him next year. I am not sure when math in school is going to push him. Right now, he finds himself challenged in his math competition program and he keeps asking to do that, so we will keep that going.