The new student assignment plan is on today's Wake County school board agenda but not the new middle school math placement policy.
School board vice chairman John Tedesco said that the second reading of the math policy was pushed to the Nov. 1 meeting because of the potential crowd today for the assignment vote.
Tedesco said he wants to adopt the math policy and deal with the concerns about the new 5th/6th grade compacted math class. One question will be whether a potential new Democratic school board majority might handle both issues differently.
At this month's ED task force meeting, staff shared this policy, this placement criteria, this R&P and this funding source info. It still includes the 70 percent EVAAS probability predictor as the floor and prevented teacher judgment from being used to keep students out of higher-level courses.
Would a new Democratic majority push the floor above 70 percent? Would a new majority modify the language so that teachers could use their judgment to both move kids up and to send them down in a math class?
Any changes would put board members at odds with Superintendent Tony Tata, who has been an enthusiastic backer of the policy.
Also during the ED task force meeting, members learned about the new compacted math class that's allowing fifth-graders to get a big head start. Targeted for academically gifted students, it would put them into position to enter middle school taking pre-algebra in sixth-grade and Algebra I in seventh-grade.
According to this handout, 525 fifth-graders across the county are taking compacted math this school year.
Some task force members complained that it was an attempt to bypass the new math guidelines that are meant to get more qualified eighth-graders in Algebra I. Tedesco said some fear that these efforts to get more students into Algebra I in seventh-grade could result in the weakening of the quality of instruction in the eighth-grade classes.
Tedesco said he believes the board can adopt the math policy next month and also review the implementation of the compacted math classes.
Would a new Democratic majority review the compacted math course or leave it alone? Would Tedesco's fellow Republicans be willing to rock the boat on something that appeals to the AG families?
Comments
the addition of compacted math is
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 18:11 — snordoneactually excellent because now we have to do an audit of AIG and ask whether there is equity in inclusion in AIG. Given our history my guess is that AIG is overwhelmingly white and NED.... So we will have to request CogAT and IBST scores and AIG differentiation to be disaggregated by race and income. More skeletons to come.
I couldn't agree more.
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 18:53 — RWTLet's not even go into the way it's administered. Pull outs that are unrelated to the curriculum are completely unhelpful. The kids need depth, not irrelevance. And math acceleration should start in kindergarten. Forcing a kid who can do multiplication to endlessly repeat worksheets on ordinal numbers is just wrong-headed. It probably causes talented kids whose parents are unable or unwilling to offer enrichment to just failing out of boredom. They get in the habit of not paying attention and then they're hosed when they are finally challenged later on.
Wow...
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 19:10 — Bob_SconceForcing a kid who can do multiplication to endlessly repeat worksheets on ordinal numbers is just wrong-headed.
Where were you when I was in 5th grade? I was hard-headed and would pick the 2 hardest problems on the worksheet and turn only those in. Then, I had to stay after school and do the rest of the worksheet. It's a crime to bore kids with math.
Same here. I was not AG. I
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 23:06 — klanders65Same here. I was not AG. I never heard of it. But thought I would die having to do the work they gave us. Being a well behaved girl, unlike Bob Sconce, I did all the boring problems and smiled. I tried to teach my son to do the same but boys don't play this game as well.
It is not just AG. It is all the kids. They all need better math instruction. Maybe this compacted 5/6 is a blessing and now we can have a good math curriculum for all the kids.
It's not math instruction
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 07:16 — RWTIt's the curriculum. It jumps all over the place. Seeing what my little kids are doing, I;m not suprised that some kids are having trouble! Combinations and permutations one week, then moving on to geometry the next. My third grader's teacher HATES that because she doesn't have enough flexibilty to bring the kids who've mastered the materials ahead while she reinforces the material with the kids who may not have gotten it. However, she has to get everyone ready for the EOG, and that means marching through the curriculum.
I'm convinced that instead of making math easier and broader, it would have been more approriate to make it more challenging and more logical in progression. And by "challenging," i don't mean "faster" or "more topics." I mean more depth, more applicability.
"Advanced 6th grade math?"
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 13:46 — turnerk1I think I have a guess as to what happened to "Advanced 6th grade math" on the pacing chart. It looks to me that everyone takes what used to be called "Advanced 6th grade math" (unless they've had the compacted math in 5th grade). If everyone is taking it, how can one call it Advanced? Isn't it just Math at that point? Then, it seems that if a student does very poorly in 6th grade math they are shunted to a slower track that puts them in Algebra I in 9th grade, otherwise, they are on track to take Algebra I in 8th grade. It actually doesn't, in practice, seem that different than what happened with my middle child who just finished middle school, with the BIG caveat that NO ONE is given the option of the slower track right from 6th grade as was the case when she was in MS. This seems like an improvement to me, as it assumes that all children have the capacity to take Algebra I in 8th grade unless proven otherwise.
Math Placement Policy
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 11:58 — specialedOnce again, we are rushing into something that may come back to haunt us or worse yet may cripple some students for years to come. The math placement policy sounds good, looks good and is being touted as a fix for ED students who were denied higher level math placement because of some mean-spirited, bigoted teacher. We are basing the new policy on a one dimensional test score. We have ignored the fact that successful students must have more than "innate" ability. Everyone does not have the ability, the study habits or the interest to successfully grasp higher mathematics. Everyone is NOT college bound, nor should they be.
There are some conflicting studies that suggest that some students are born with the ability to excel at math. We DO know that Einstein's inferior parietal lobe regions were larger and wider than normal. We DO know that math is localized in a different area of the brain than speech or language. Bright students who excel in reading and language may not excel in math. We DO know that Asian students may be more proficient in math because of their lanaguage. For example, the word structure used for numbers in Chinese is far more clear and logical than other languages. In Chinese, there are no special words for 11-19 or multiples of Ten (20, 30, 40, etc.).
What will happen to those students who barely manage to pass an algebra class in middle school when they reach high school where they must have three (3) math credits to graduate?? Do we create math classes for them at the high school level?? If so, where do we get the additional teachers and supplies, and what will the curriculum be??
Sorry to be so long winded, but this topic has bothered me for quite some time. It seems that those who are really enthusiastic about this new policy are those who are not educators! We need to think this through and do OUR homework before we push for something that may not be in the best interest for A LOT of our students, ED or otherwise.
I can't agree more. We are
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 23:35 — klanders65I can't agree more. We are rushing into this compacted 5/6 math and no one has studied it. This could haunt us for years to come. Unlike EVAAS, which is based on the entire history of achievement data, the CogAt is a one dimensional score. And here we almost based our whole math policy on that.
Oh wait. You've got a mistake in the second paragraph. There are no conflicting studies about students being born with innate ability. That is why the testing companies no longer test for that. Math isn't localized. You are nuts. You have a little bit of correctness about their language making number understanding easier.
Your next paragraph... "What will happen to those students who barely manage to pass an algebra class in middle school..."students who barely pass 8th grade algebra will retake it in Algebgra plus, which will reinforce what they learned and give them extra time to mature. And this will keep them on the top track. We do not allow failure of our top track kids. When they fail, we say they just weren't ready and teach them again.
Those who are really enthusiastic about this (what is this? the policy to put only the AIG kids in the top track, or the policy to give access to the top track to kids who have demonstrated content mastery?)
Where do we get the addional geometry teachers for middle school? Who are these people? Who are you?
Hardly rushing in
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 06:11 — RWTHaving a secret math class that's offered to handpicked kids is hardly rushing into things. I'm glad it's not a secret any more.
While there is a correlation of AIG kids and compacted 5/6 math, AIG is not a requirement. It just so happens that the placement criteria is going to identify kids who are already in AIG. I was glad to see that the criteria also allowed for kids who were getting 4s but didn't have the test scores, as some talented children just don't test well.
I just don't see the point in limiting the class to whatever number the AIG teacher can handle. If 20 students qualify and/or their parents ask for it, then the class should be offered to all 20, not just to 8. If the AIG teacher balks at teaching 20, then he or she should look for a different job.
AIG status
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 08:20 — lferreriAccording to the placement criteria given out at the last ED Task Force meeting, AG status is required for admission to this course. Keung has posted a link to this, I believe. The three groups eligible for admission are students with a Very Strong AIG identification (group 1), students with a Strong AIG identification and 98% or above on aptitude and achievement tests (group 2), and students with a Strong AIG identification nominated by the SBCGE (group 3). All three groups also need some additional evidence of readiness from Level 4 profile cards and work samples. There is no group that does not require AIG status.
By your logic
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 12:16 — SDR256By your logic kids who are good in math should be put on a lower path for writing and reading? Chinese kids should be promoted to higher math because of their language?
Innate ability? What are you talking about? If a child has a score that says they can glean something from the class they should take it. Education never hurt anyone. If they fail, as per klanders' post below, they can take it again in 9th grade.
Your example about Einstein sounds a bit like eugenics. Are we going to start measuring craniums?
WOW! If we ever start to
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 13:54 — specialedWOW! If we ever start to measure craniums, we should start with yours. For you to logically conclude that my post meant that we should deny students who excel in math a higher level language class or that all Asian students excel in math because of their language is ridiculous!
There are a variety of reasons why some students do well at higher mathematics and some don't. To use one test score (and 70% at that) for placement and then to suggest that if they fail tough...they can always take it again, is not something I can accept.
I hope you know that the nature/nurture battle is one that never seems to go away. It is still a fact that we all have some innate abilities and that it differs from person to person.
EVAAS preditction is not one
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 23:46 — klanders65EVAAS preditction is not one test score. It is a sophistocated prediction based on all prior test scores, and comparisons to what has happened in the past. This is how SAS makes money. They predict for businesses what people will do, based on what they have done in the past, compared to all people like them who did that in the past. The EVAAS prediction is like that.
When you type a typo into Google, and it says, Did you mean ...? It is almost always right. Do you know how Google knows that? It does analytics on what everyone who ever made your same typo ended up actually wanting. This is analytics. It is not research. It is new.
EVAAS looks at the entire academic history of students and says that students who were just like this academically in the past, were successful when they did x.
You don't have a sophistocated understanding of this so you can't understand anything about the 70%. You don't know what that means. What if Google set the bar at 70% for first try for when people do a typo? They have to make decisions. If they get this far into the word, and the letters are ... then 70% of the time they wanted ... If we have more information we can fine tune it... And 96% of the time they get the right guess if they set the bar at 70%. So, they have a board meeting and decide to set it there. 4% of the time, people will not get the correct response when Google says "did you mean....x?"
What do you think about that? Should Google not do that? This is what EVAAS does. You don't understand it. And you do not understand that we do not let our top track kids fail. We teach them again and keep them on the top track.
5th/6th compacted Math
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 11:20 — RWT"Some task force members complained that it was an attempt to bypass the new math guidelines that are meant to get more qualified eighth-graders in Algebra I. Tedesco said some fear that these efforts to get more students into Algebra I in seventh-grade could result in the weakening of the quality of instruction in the eighth-grade classes."
This is supposed to be targeted at students who are at the top 2 to 5% of their class by test scores. Now I know that some schools placement is also based on classroom performance and that teachers and administrators can keep kids out or let them in based on personal prejudice. At least that was the way it was at a certain magnet school in western Wake last year, when my son was excluded from the compacted class.
However, the discretionary part of placement should be removed from teachers and principals who are inclined to admit the unqualified or unwilling offspring of active PTA volunteers or to exclude children whom they don't like, find disruptive, or are otherwise prejudiced against, or who have been performing poorly because they are BORED.
Adding more
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 11:30 — RWTThe idea of the appropriate placement of AIG students in math is somehow an attempt to get around the new math placement policy is silly. This is a necessity! AIG students are routinely denied appropriate instruction due to a variety of reasons: lack of organization on the school administrators' part, overwhelming class sizes with wide spectra of student abilities, and a mistaken belief that AIG instruction is somehow a reward for well-behaved, well-connected achievers, rather than a necessity for children who are intellectually gifted.
If anything, I would like to see the ED task force focus on getting gifted ED kids the enrichment the require, rather than worrying so much about the acceleration of kids who are already identified.
Compacted Math program
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 12:46 — ElevenYearsInCaryThank goodness for the compacted math program. This is really the first time that my 5th grader has been truly challenged in school. The selection process as outlined in the link seemed to work as designed and I think it was sufficiently strict.
I cannot see how this is a reward for well-behaved, well-connected achievers, and I don't understand how it's somehow trying to get around the new math placement policy. This class, is quite candidly, pushing my child, and there is routinely a solid hour (or more) of math homework, including homework over the weekend. And I'm frequently augmenting the teacher's lessons with my own.
In my mind, this is exactly the kind of class we need within the school system, but I'm troubled by the fact that is only offered at some of the schools as indicated by the link above. That may be because the school has no students that meet the selection criteria, or they opted out of the program, or some other factor, but I want to see this kind of program expanded in the future.
That's the point. It's been
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 15:35 — RWTThat's the point. It's been kept a secret. I only learned about it because my child is very observant and inquisitive. It's not as though a note went out to all parents asking if we would like our children to participate. It was offered only to select children, who all happened to be the well-behaved, docile children of active PTA parents.
My child routinely scores 99 %tile on every standardized test, including ACT Explore. The single exception was the CogAT, which he got a 97%tile because he was sick and I forgot to give him his ADD medicine. This was the excuse used to keep him out, but I think part of the reason is because he asked the AG teacher to her face, "Why aren't there any black kids in AG?"
I home schooled him in 6th grade math over the summer. He passed the pre-algebra placement test and is thriving happily in a challenging 6th grade pre-algebra class.
This program needs to be expanded and offered to all students.
So...
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 15:59 — Bob_SconcePlease tell me somethign about the pre-algebra placement test -- how did you request it? WHen was it? Did the school give you any flack about it?
Frankly, it seems a bit late to get my 5th grader into the accellerated 5th grade math class (Thanks WCPSS, ever so much, for telling me about it in time! No wonder people are leaving for charter and private schools). But, I'll be darned if they're going to hide the ball from me again.
What I did
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 07:08 — RWTHow we got around the exclusion:
1. His fifth grade teacher was angry that my kid and a couple other of her students didn't get the compacted class. She taught them herself through differentiation using materials that she obtained from the used-textbook warehouse. This was very challenging to her because she had a huge class with an very wide range of abilites as well as the usual cast of disruptive students. After her mighty effort, she then signed math placement cards to place her differentiated kids in pre-algebra.
2. I took my kid through 6th grade math at home over the summer, making sure that he understood everything and was prepared for any placement testing that might occur once he arrived at middle school. The materials I used were used NC 6th grade math books and an online course offered by Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth (which offers year-round enrollment if you're interested). I am fortunate to be a SAHM and to have the flexibility and resources to do this, but my kid would have rather been playing than doing math for 60 minutes, 3x/week over his summer break. We're also lucky to have a proper summer break.
The only problem is that many middle schools (especially year-round) may not offer a 6th grade PA class for 2012-2013 and will place qualfied kids in a mixed-age class. We discovered that was the case for both of our base schools for 2011-12. While that is less than optimal, it is probably not insurmountable for a well-adjusted child.
The test
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 17:26 — RWTIt was offered to all incoming sixth graders.
no no no, it was not.
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 23:48 — klanders65no no no, it was not.
Sorry. More specifically
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 06:54 — RWTThe test was offered to incoming 6th graders at our school. Parents were informed of the test and told to sign their kids up if they were interested, and the qualified kids are taking pre-algebra. Our school offers two pre-algebra sections to sixth graders.
At another school, ALL incoming 6th graders were tested. That school offers 6th grade algebra as well as 6th grade pre-algebra.
At our base school, there was no test, but incoming 6th graders could bring their own math placement cards and/or proof of having completed a 6th grade math course online or at a summer school. The school stressed to me that if my child was struggling by the 20th day of school, he would be moved into advanced 6th grade math. They also told me that they did not offer a 6th grade pre-algebra class, and that my child would go into a mixed-age pre-algebra section.
I was told that placement
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 16:20 — danofncI was told that placement was based on the scores on the ITBS, CoGAT, and 3rd and 4th grade. All four scores had to be greater than 98%tile.
So...
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 16:51 — Bob_SconceCan't tell you about all of them. AG in math with a "strong need", got a 4 in 4th grade math last year. This year's teacher appears to be differentiating, but that's not enough -- my kid is getting bored and needs to go faster since the differentiation doesn't really advance the material -- it just tries to show some sort of "deeper" mastery of the existing material. Further, it seems like the placement criteria isn't consistent school-to-school.
In any case, schools should not have secret invite-only classes. I don't have much of a problem with the invite-only part; the secret part, though, is a big problem.
So far, I've been pretty successful at advocating for my own kids, but I can't advocate for things I don't know about. (Yes, some might call that being pushy. But, so far, my pushing has gotten my kids into classes where they've done well.)
You and everyone else. And
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 23:53 — klanders65You and everyone else. And the policy they tried to get the board to vote on put yours and all other who were not identified for this into the standard sixth grade math. They no longer were going to have advanced.
Are you Black? These secret invite only classes are all over the place, and mostly it was to keep Black kids out. But they have made a mistake this time. They are keeping out high achieving high income white kids.
In the past, students who were not recommended for a class in high school wouldn't even know it existed. They could only see the courses for which they were recommended.
This is how they have been used to operating. They had to make a new math track. They tried to get everyone in who might cause trouble. You should be blogging under your real name. Then your kids would be in the track.
I think you should
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 17:09 — danofncI think you should definitely find out why you weren't informed of the class.....especially if your child should be in it.
I wouldn't call it pushy. I'd call it the exact type of parent involvement that every administrator always says they want to see.
Offered to all students
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 15:44 — ElevenYearsInCaryI don't understand how this can be offered to all students. I agree that all QUALIFIED students should have this opportunity, and I think that's what the selection criteria were designed to assess. All students were assessed against those criteria, and some small number passed that criteria. Maybe there could be an appeals process, but I would not expect that every interested parent would be able have their child placed in the program.
I do think that some of the limitations are found in having a teacher than can teach this material. I think one of the schools had 30 kids in compacted math -- maybe it's one class, or two, or three -- I don't know. In our school, it's about a dozen kids for the one class. Maybe they could have taken more. What I do believe is that if this one class had 30 kids, it could not be successful.
And as I said in a separate post, I struggle with how some schools don't even offer the class at all, or only have 1-2 students. I would have hoped that every school would have some students that were qualifed for this type of advanced class.
What I meant
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 17:23 — RWTEvey parent should have been made aware of the existence of the class and the placement criteria. It should not have been a secret.
There is no reason why the class could not be handled by a regular classroom teacher. Their licenses are K-6.
I've heard that at least one other magnet school offers cross-grade instruction by having all grades offer math at the same time and then having the children change classes. My son received cross-grade instruction until 4th grade, when I took him out of it because budget cuts caused a huge asynchrony among the fourth and fifth grade math times. He would have missed language arts and been stuck in two math classes, one of which he had already successfully completed the previous year.
It used to be that the advanced kids were stuck on a bus and taken to middle school during fifth grade. They missed a lot of instruction inohter subjects because of that. At least now sixth grade math is being offered in elementary
school.
Limiting class size just for the gifted is patently unfair because EVERY child would benefit from a smaller class size. A good teacher would be able to work with a larger class because she wouldn't be differentiating across a huge ability spectrum.
There is no reason why the
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 14:10 — NWRaleighMomThere is no reason why the class could not be handled by a regular classroom teacher. Their licenses are K-6.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think this is true. Usually licenses are for K-5. You need a teacher with a middle school math license to teach this class.
I have a child in compact math. This is the best thing that happened to him in WCPSS so far. He is not a quiet child but is smart and scores well most of the time :-) I don't think the curriculum is appropriate for everyone but Level 4 students are a good fit for it (regardless of their AG status).
Really?
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 16:01 — Bob_SconceAdvanced 6th grade math isn't rocket science -- I'd be surprised if there are 5th grade teachers who couldn't teach the material.
Be surprised Bob. We are
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 23:57 — klanders65Be surprised Bob. We are talking about math. Many 5th grade teachers can't teach 5th grade math.
A little more complicated
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 11:49 — SDR256Its a little more complicated than that, unfortunately. There is a core group that has been following this issue and pushing for just what you state is needed - getting gifted ED kids the enrichment they need AS WELL AS just getting ALL kids placed appropriately based on their data - their scores.
The problem with this new math channel is that it creates two tracks. The new math track doesn't have kids with higher scores, so why are there two tracks? The new math track, I have heard, does have mostly white kids. Why? And why the big hurry in secret to implement it? Why can't all the kids with the appropriate scores be in the same track?
It looks a little fishy and those who have been following this for awhile have their sad suspicions about why, and that the previous 'fast track' Algebra 1 in 8th grade will no longer be the track to get you to college level math based studies like engineering.
Hope this makes a bit of sense regarding the concerns.
I was told that placement
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 13:31 — RWTI was told that placement was based on the scores on the ITBS, CoGAT, and 3rd and 4th grade. All four scores had to be greater than 98%tile. I think this number was chosen to keep the class size small so the poor AG teacher wouldn't be overwhelmed. Classroom teachers routinely handle classes greater than 20. WTH is wrong with AIG teachers that they can only teach 8?
Why mollycoddle them, and why ration the math?
I absolutely cannot stand that the schools keep ANY qualified child out of enrichment. Good grades and active parents should not be a pre-requisite.
I don't think this track is new...
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 12:10 — croaswifeI believe the super fast-track of Pre-Algebra/Algebra I/Geometry in middle school has always been an option but the required mastery of 6th grade curriculum to get into Pre-Algebra in 6th grade was not being provided at the elementary level at most schools in spite of the fact that there were highly gifted students with the ability and test scores at the highest ends of the bell curve that could have been tackling the rigorous work. It was very frustrating for parents to know they had fully capable children not accelerating with their peers because of what school they attended. The 5th/6th grade being offered at all elementary schools to those students that qualify is finally providing some equity that wasn't there before. Again you are talking about a very small percentage of students. I think the concern about too many being pulled ahead of the regular Algebra I track is unwarranted.
The concern is that they
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 00:12 — klanders65The concern is that they eliminated the advanced 6th grade math and made pre algebra the advanced 6. Everyone else got standard math.
Do you realize that 5th, 6th, 7th, and pre algebra only differ by a couple topics?
A few years ago, what school was attended determined whether or not your level 4 kid was on the track to algebra.
All they did was recreate this system they had before the data driven system. They recreated the hand-picked system.
There is no equity because placement is not based on anything objective and all schools don't have this class.
This is designed to create a hand picked math track, and to dumb down all other students, including Bob Sconce's kids--because he didn't figure out how to threaten them. He mistakenly believed in some sort of equity or something. His kids are now doomed to the low remedial pretend courses that used to be reserved for low income and minority kids. But this new math policy has made it necessary to pull out all the stops. They have to circle the wagons and he wasn't inside.
Sorry Bob. No cigar.
6 th grade math
Sun, 10/23/2011 - 03:18 — amit28itYou guys have discussed a good topic .These days no one is giving attention on these standards.We must focus on it .So here Students must be precise in their use of language. When reading 34, phrases such as
“three to the four” or “three four” should be corrected. Students should use the special
names for the powers two and three: squared and cubed. The expression 32 is read
“three to the second power,” “three squared,” or “the square of three.” Similarly, 33 is
read “three to the third power,” “three cubed,” or “the cube of three.” When written,
numerals and words may be used interchangeably, as in “3 to the 4th power.”
Mathematical Practices
2. Reason abstractly and
quantitatively.
6. Attend to precision.
7. Look for and make use of
structure.
8. Look for and express regularity
in repeated reasoning
When assessing this standard from a skill perspective, students must demonstrate they can
write an exponential expression in words as well as numerals. Assessments must go beyond
the tasks “Find the value of 34,” or “Expand 34.” Students must also be able write “3 to the 4th power” as 34 and vice versa. They
should be able to identify any part of an exponential expression not only by name, but by value. That is, students should be able to
find the missing exponent in , the missing base in, and show that can be written in the shorthand .
This standard links to several others in the CCSS, such as the multiplication of fractions. Thus, instruction of this standard should include fractions. Students should learn . When computing powers of rational numbers, students should explore the fact that as the power of a positive
fraction less than one increases, the resulting products get progressively smaller. These are things our
current textbooks do not have and must be supplemented.
Connections
There is also a deep connection to be made in simplifying fractions. Students should know that if the base
of an exponential cannot be simplified, then the resulting product cannot be. Furthermore, if there is a
common factor between the numerator and denominator in the base, then the product will have a common
factor equal to the power of the base’s common factor
For example, since
cannot be simplified, then
cannot be. On the other hand, since the numerator and
have a common factor of two, then
has a common factor of 23 8 . Have students explore this
and explain why it is true. Do not simply tell it as a fact to be memorized.
denominator of
Finally, this standard connects well to area and volume. When we find the area of a plane figure, we are multiplying
quantities with two units. If both of those units are centimeters, we essentially have cm cm = cm2. For volume,
cm cm cm = cm3. The notation for square and cubic units follows from our power shorthand. In science courses, it is
acceptable to read those as “centimeters squared” and “centimeters cubed.” In the context of measurement, students should
say and write “square centimeters” and “cubic centimeters,” as that is our common language.
A good number of textbooks, websites, videos, and other media define exponentiation in one of two ways: repeated multiplication
or that a n means n factors of a. Those definitions may work for now, but will cause problems later down the road. Here’s why. In
later grades, students use exponents of 0, 1, negative numbers, and fractions (e.g. 30, 31, 3–1, 31⁄2). In 30, how does one multiply 3 zero
times? What does it mean to have –1 factors of 3 in 3–1? And just what does an exponent of 1⁄2 mean? Just like when primary
students are told, “You can’t subtract the bigger number from the smaller,” defining exponentials poorly leaves misconceptions to
be undone in later grades. We should phrases like “34 means three is multiplied by four times.”Visit this link http://math.tutorvista.com/sixth-grade.html
Amit Kumar
really?
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 13:44 — turnerk1"This is designed to create a hand picked math track, and to dumb down all other students ...."
I'm sorry, but that is just a gross exaggeration. First of all, it is clear from the math proposal that all kids (with the exception of 525 students - a tiny percentage of the total 5th graders in WCPSS) will be placed into a 6th grade math class that is supposed to carry them to Algebra I in 8th grade. The good news is that means that what used to be an advanced class (just for the top students), is now just regular math which seems to me to be an indication of great improvement in math instruction in ES. According to the math policy anyone who scores a 3 on the EOG should be in 6th grade math that would lead them to Algebra I in 8th grade. Secondly, how can you call a course pathway that is intended to bring the majority of the students in a school to a math placement that is a year ahead of the state requirements "a low remedial pretend course"? That's just absurd.
I don't see that
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 21:14 — lferreriI don't see that from the material they distributed. If you are looking at the sheet that shows math sequences, it only shows the "honors pathway" in math. There will still be qualifications to get into Pre-Algebra in 7th and Algebra in 8th so not everyone will be on one of the paths depicted. The pathways only carry them into 8th grade Algebra if they are on the "honors sequence". (See the note below the depiction of the pathways)
I would like to see "great improvement in math instruction" too. But instead what seems to be happening is that parents and the public are not being given adequate information to make decisions and, as a result, what should be a transparent process is becoming even more opaque. There has been no clear explanation about why what used to be a choice of either 6th Grade Math or Advanced 6th Grade Math has become one class labeled "Advanced". We also don't know why so many school have no one enrolled in 5th/6th Compacted Math, why many parents were not informed about the class or why some schools have so many students enrolled in it. There are a lot of unanswered questions about both the process for creating the new math criteria and the ways in which they are being implemented.
agree
Thu, 10/20/2011 - 20:15 — turnerk1I agree that 6th graders are not on an automatic path to 8th grade algebra in this plan, but I think starting everyone off in the same class rather than immediately disaggregating them into a path where there is no chance to move on to 8th grade algebra is a big step forward. Obviously if even one child is held back from taking a class because of racism or classism (conscious or unconscious) that is wrong. However, I do think that it is a difficult question to decide at what point challenging a student becomes setting a child up for failure, which is a horrible situation for anyone to find themselves in, and can be quite distructive.
I've had two kids go through two different MS in WCPSS. In one case I felt that the school pushed so hard that it became dispiriting and even a little soul-crushing for my child who thought he could never measure up to expectations I felt were completely inappropriate for his age, maturity and intellectual level. At a different school, I felt that the staff was too ready to hold my daughter back because they wanted everyone to get an A in an easier class rather than a B or C in a harder class. Neither situation was a good one, though I appreciated that it is difficult, if not impossible, to draw a bright line that is appropriate for every student.
Happy medium
Thu, 10/20/2011 - 21:23 — lferreriI agree that it can be difficult to strike a happy medium, challenging children without swamping them with work that is too difficult. I see what is happening as doing each to different groups of children. (It sounds as if you have had both experiences.) On the one hand, many children who are likely to do quite well in advanced math classes are not being placed in those classes. Last year there were over 2,900 students with predicted probabilities of 90% or above who were not placed. If my child were in this situation, I would want him or her to be in the advanced track since past performance indicates that my child is very likely to succeed. I wouldn't want my child to be in a class that is not challenging.
On the other hand, WCPSS has now promoted the widespread creation of a compacted 5th and 6th Grade Math class. I'm not sure that I would want my child in this class unless I believed him or her to be very gifted in math. The criteria imply that only a small percentage of students will be placed in this class, but the criteria seem very subjective. Personally, I would rather rely on my child's mastery of the content as shown by the EOG in grades 3 and 4 than on identification as "Very Strong" or "Strong" AIG, but that is not how placement is being done. (I'm not even sure I understand how these subcategories of AIG are determined. Apparently, a student can score at the 98th or 99th percentile on the CogAT and ITBS and still be only categorized as "Strong".) From the data we were given at the ED Task Force meeting, it appears that some schools are placing virtually all of their AIG students into this class which also seems likely to create frustration for some of the students.
I agree with you that I'd rather have my child be challenged than be placed in an easier class just because the child can be sure of getting an A. In my experience, students may grumble a bit but they like to feel that they are stretching themselves.
From what I can tell
Thu, 10/20/2011 - 22:48 — RWTAt our school, top-scoring kids who don't want to to put out their very best effort for the AG teacher will get bumped from very strong to strong regardless of how they perform academically for their real teacher. Not a good mix if a child resents the extra work or doesn't like the AG teacher.
Kids whose parents refuse participation in AG pull outs may also see their kids's identification bumped down, regardless of the reason for turning down the opportunity. Truly, our elementary AG teacher is no prize and actually YELLED at the kids in the compacted math class laste year (and remember, these were the docile kids). She should be a band director if she wants to yell at people.
First of all, they
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 19:58 — klanders65First of all, they originally had all the sixth graders that weren't in the pre algebra in a standard, not advanced course. They were going to give them all standard math. When that was pointed out, they changed the name to advanced. When they had Algebraic Thinking in some schools, they gave all sixth graders advanced math. They provided support, professional development, and resources. They said they could not expand this to other schools because of the resources required. So, to simply change the name of the course from standard to advanced, and not provide any professional development or additional resources seems to me like it is a change in name only.
They are not going to prepare all kids for the track that leads to algebra in 8th grade. They are going to prepare them for a standard track. They may offer a version of what is now 9th grade algebra to the top kids in this bottom track. It won't be rigorous and will not prepare kids for success in subsequent math and science courses.
If this is not their plan, why did they do this so under the radar? Why did they have standard 6th as the only option for the sixth graders not in the top track? Why was it this way before the math placement issue arose?
I think odds are far more likely that I am right. It fit with everything that has ever happened in this school system.
filtering
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 12:21 — SDR256All sounds good.
Except.....
why is the filtering mechanism for who goes into which track different? Those that are in the new, higher level are 'hand picked' - not by score but by teacher.
Those that go into the Algebra 1 in eighth grade used to be handpicked. Now that the data-driven approach has been implemented, a new track for the handpicked is created. Why? Why aren't they both done the same way - with data?
And why is the representation in the new track decidedly UNdiverse?
Yeah, well, this is how math
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 11:39 — klanders65Yeah, well, this is how math placement used to work to get in to 8th grade algebra. The AIG students were identified using some kind of fuzzy method, then they took pre-algebra in 7th and algebra in 8th. That system was fine for them up until now. What happened all of a sudden? Why do they suddenly need to shift this back a year?
Why did they eliminate Advanced 6th grade math on the policy presented to the Board last week, and these AIG students who took compacted 5/6 were the only students who would be in a more advanced class than standard? Plenty of AIG students are not in compacted 5/6 if it is the top 5% or whatever. It is a fuzzy 5%. 5% of what?
70% EVAAS
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 11:06 — MariagerwinSt
StSSSS StStStudents in the 70 percentile EVAAS probablility predictor are not going to be given a fair shake at passing Algebra I. Students in a higher percentile have trouble in Algebra I. Not all 11, 12, and 13 year old kids have developed the ability of abstract thinking which is required in Algebra I. Research I have done, says that abstract thinking begins to develope around 13 years of age but for the majority of people not until 16 to 18 years of age. Yes some kids will fly through Algebra I, but those that don't and expected they would are being set up to fail. We want to be competitive with China, Japan... we need not discourage our kids. Math is hard enough, don't set the majority of kids up to fail. Therefore I feel that the EVAAS predictor should be NO lower than 85% AND should include teacher input.
Not all schools in Wake County teach to the same high standards. So precentiles will differ from school to school. Algebra I is a HIGH SCHOOL level course and as such should be held to the high school standard.
Also kids still need 4 math credits to graduate high school, some will be pushed to take advanced math courses that they probably shouldn't or have no interest in taking.
I'm not saying don't push our kids for excellence, not even close, it just needs to be done by more than ONE test score(EOC) in ONE software program(EVAAS).
Objective placement criteria
Tue, 10/18/2011 - 19:58 — lferreriI don't think students are being "pushed to take advanced math courses". Under the proposed placement criteria, parents can opt out of an advanced placement. But I believe that objective criteria are needed. Last year students with an EVAAS prediction of 90% or above passed the EOG/EOC at rates of 99.6%, 99.3%, and 97.6% in the sixth, seventh and eighth grade. Yet 2,932 students with this level of EVAAS prediction were not placed in advanced classes. We cannot continue to fail to challenge so many children which seems to occurs when subjective criteria are used. (By the way, teachers can still place children in advanced math based on their judgments so they still have input, and EVAAS is based on at least three scores not one.)
For what is worth I was told
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 07:22 — MariagerwinFor what is worth I was told by 2 teachers, a counselor and a principal that EVAAS was based on 1 score, the EOC.
Based on EOG scores and the students history that can give teachers an idea of how students will fair in an advanced course. Yes teacher's can have input, but it is limited, very limited. Parents can have input if they are aware of the system. The EVAAS system still rules the roost.
Incorrect information
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 07:56 — lferreriThe two teachers, counselor, and principal who told you this were wrong. EVAAS does not even create a score without at least three data points. It bothers me that school personnel are incorrectly describing how the prediction is made. The EVAAS prediction is based on the EOG scores so the use of those scores for determining how a student will fare in a course is exactly what the model does.
I don't see how you can say that the teachers' input is "limited, very limited" when they can place any kid into advanced math classes based on their professional judgment. The only thing they are prevented from doing is denying access to a child who has the qualifying prediction.
Just curious, where are you
Wed, 10/19/2011 - 10:04 — MariagerwinJust curious, where are you getting your information from?
There are a variety of sources
Thu, 10/20/2011 - 00:39 — nmoskalIf you google EVAAS, you will find a variety of sources of information from "laymen" level presentations to White Papers written by and for PhDs. There is also a section on NCDPI's site with information. Below is a layman level presentation.
http://www.trianglehighfive.org/pdf/003_SAS_EVAAS_for_Teachers.pdf