Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
interesting about the math, because our main issue here was the Math it was called Trail Blazers and it was the MOST awful math that our county used..with that they are finally after all these years gettng rid of it, and going to a more tradional/visual math program..I will have to look into this since my dd has major challenges with Math and Comprehension...thanks guys that is what I was looking for
I haven't been following the math issue closely as it will not affect my daughter (who is currently a senior). But apparently some changes have happened since I last looked at it. They are no longer going to use the "Math 1", "Math 2", etc titles for high school classes. They are going to stick to the traditional topics (algebra, geometry, trig, calculus). But it looks like they are being forced to use this "integrated" approach to teaching the subjects as this is being mandated by the state.
Here is an article which hopefully explains it better:
I haven't been following the math issue closely as it will not affect my daughter (who is currently a senior). But apparently some changes have happened since I last looked at it. They are no longer going to use the "Math 1", "Math 2", etc titles for high school classes. They are going to stick to the traditional topics (algebra, geometry, trig, calculus). But it looks like they are being forced to use this "integrated" approach to teaching the subjects as this is being mandated by the state.
Here is an article which hopefully explains it better:
Sounds like the "new math" program that Cherokee is starting to use. My neighbor is a first year HS math teacher at Woodstock High- he came up from Orlando- and he says they're all scratching their head on how to cram all of the math topics they're supposed to cover into the school year. It's a novel, new approach, apparently- for better or worse.
thanks Bill, great link, so I am safe to say they will be learning Traditional Math in Elem school as I still have 2 more years with my dd...My son is entering HS in the Fall...
Sounds like the "new math" program that Cherokee is starting to use.
Yes it is a state mandate. I'm hoping that by the time my other child makes it to high school someone in the state will have realized how stupid the whole idea was and change it back. In the meantime I will probably have her do Saxon math workbooks during the summer to make sure she's actually learning real math. Poor kid.
South Forsyth schools are excellent; they are one of the top reasons why we moved back into this area. Sharon Elementary, Settles Bridge Elementary, Riverwatch Middle, South Forysth High School are all excellent. I mention these specifically because I know personally about those. And Lambert, a new high school, will open this fall. It's already getting rave reviews because people with great leadership and experience are being gathered to form the staff. For example, already 7 of the hired staff have excellent resumes including teacher of the year honors. Other South Forsyth schools as well as West Forsyth schools are great too. Central and North Forsyth schools are good and are working to get even better. If we were moving right now, I would choose South Forsyth because you get the best of both worlds - great schools (like the great ones in North Fulton) and lower taxes than Fulton county. South and West Forsyth areas are both upscale and growing more than other areas of Forsyth, and South is more established than West. You'll notice this by driving in these areas.
Regarding math (since it has been brought up), both of our kids are doing well. And, that says a lot because our daughter has always struggled in math. I think it has a lot to do with how a teacher teaches it as well as parental involvement. Our son is a wiz at it, so he's in a higher level class. There are multiple levels of math taught; basic, advanced, and accelerated. At the specific schools I mentioned, Spanish and French are taught at all three levels (elementary, middle, and high schools). At SFHS and Lambert, German and Latin are taught as well. We are very pleased with the administration, staff, programs, parental involvement, etc.
I haven't been following the math issue closely as it will not affect my daughter (who is currently a senior). But apparently some changes have happened since I last looked at it. They are no longer going to use the "Math 1", "Math 2", etc titles for high school classes. They are going to stick to the traditional topics (algebra, geometry, trig, calculus). But it looks like they are being forced to use this "integrated" approach to teaching the subjects as this is being mandated by the state.
Here is an article which hopefully explains it better:
Sounds like the "new math" program that Cherokee is starting to use. My neighbor is a first year HS math teacher at Woodstock High- he came up from Orlando- and he says they're all scratching their head on how to cram all of the math topics they're supposed to cover into the school year. It's a novel, new approach, apparently- for better or worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
Yes it is a state mandate. I'm hoping that by the time my other child makes it to high school someone in the state will have realized how stupid the whole idea was and change it back. In the meantime I will probably have her do Saxon math workbooks during the summer to make sure she's actually learning real math. Poor kid.
Bill
Have mercy on the GA Dept of Education. They take all this heat for our state scoring so badly on SATs. Recognizing that today's students will be having to compete in a global economy with their peers from all over the world, they decide to not merely catch up Georgia's math curriculum to middle-of-the-pack US standards, but to aim for excellence. They study math curricula from all over and devise a new Georgia curriculum based on what they deem to be the best models - Japan and North Carolina. Japan's students score very well on international tests; North Carolina has made huge strides in math, and their population demographics are very similar to Georgia's.
Sounds great, eh? No, of course not, say the parents. It's NEW! It's not "traditional"! It's too easy! It's too hard! The courses don't have names like Algebra, Geometry and Calculus so the poor kids are not being taught algebra, geometry and calculus! What a hellish mistake for Georgia to try to be at the forefront of math. Let's back off from all this insanity and go back to our traditional math education. It's been serving us SO well.
My kid is on the bleeding edge of the new curriculum introduction in Cobb County, where this change has been embraced. It was tough having no textbooks in middle school. I'm not saying everything is perfect. But it's very good. My kid is now a 9th grader in Accelerated Math II, and this year has been covering math topics that I learned in 11th grade, 12th grade and first year university, back in the day. Matrices and determinants, trigonometry, logarithms. (Polynomials were last year).
I am very hopeful that my kid, who aspires to become an engineer, will graduate from high school with two AP math courses behind her and ready to do very well at math in college, and compete in the workforce with all those hard-studying Indian and Chinese students who want to grab all the good jobs. Cobb County schools gets a huge thumbs-up from me on this one. Too bad for those of you who live in educationally unprogressive counties.
Sounds great, eh? No, of course not, say the parents. It's NEW! It's not "traditional"! It's too easy! It's too hard! The courses don't have names like Algebra, Geometry and Calculus so the poor kids are not being taught algebra, geometry and calculus! What a hellish mistake for Georgia to try to be at the forefront of math. Let's back off from all this insanity and go back to our traditional math education. It's been serving us SO well.
My older brothers were victims of the "new math" craze of the 60s. It did not serve them well and their education suffered because of it. I don't want to see the same mistake happen again.
Quote:
I am very hopeful that my kid, who aspires to become an engineer, will graduate from high school with two AP math courses behind her and ready to do very well at math in college....
I just hope for her sake that the college she applies to has an entrance committee that understands what "Integrated Math I", "Integrated Math II", etc mean. Otherwise they will look at her transcript and say "where's algebra? where's trigonometry? where's calculus?" Then it wont just be the backwards "unprogressive" parents saying that. It will be the people who will decide your child's future when they try to determine if her education was up to their standards by merely looking at a dozen pieces of paper. Of course this will likely be no problem if she goes to a Georgia school. But what if she aspires to something else?
I have no objection to attempts to introduce advanced math concepts at an earlier age. I'm fine with that. I'm also fine with teaching them problem solving skills. But all of that will be utterly pointless if the students can't add, subtract, multiply, and divide. Without the fundamentals, everything else is wasted effort. Thus my comment about summer reviews with a solid and traditional curriculum, what you would call "old-fashioned" and "unprogressive".
My older brothers were victims of the "new math" craze of the 60s. It did not serve them well and their education suffered because of it. I don't want to see the same mistake happen again.
Everyone knows there were problems with 1960s "new math". But does this unfortunate history mean that it is never appropriate to make any change to any state math curriculum, ever again? Georgia's new math curriculum is not a 1960s "new math" curriculum; it's a math curriculum that's new. It did seem to be widely thought (by parents too) that the previous curriculum was not serving Georgia students particularly well, and there was room for improvement. However, you can't have improvement without change, and change gets people upset and worried that we're bringing back "new math".
Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
I just hope for her sake that the college she applies to has an entrance committee that understands what "Integrated Math I", "Integrated Math II", etc mean. Otherwise they will look at her transcript and say "where's algebra? where's trigonometry? where's calculus?" Then it wont just be the backwards "unprogressive" parents saying that. It will be the people who will decide your child's future when they try to determine if her education was up to their standards by merely looking at a dozen pieces of paper. Of course this will likely be no problem if she goes to a Georgia school. But what if she aspires to something else?
I've heard this argument before, and it really amazes me. Georgia's k-12 curriculum designers, studying the more successful examples from elsewhere, concluded that an integrated curriculum that weaves together units on algebra, geometry, etc. each year, is more effective for students than a whole year of algebra, then a whole year of geometry, etc. However, the argument goes that we can't switch to the more effective curriculum model, that would help students learn math better, because then we can't point to whole-year courses named Algebra, Geometry, etc., which would cause college admissions committees to conclude that students from Georgia do not study algebra, geometry, etc. What a bizarre priority - we can't improve the courses because we have to keep the course names the same, so college admissions committees don't get confused? For Pete's sake, what in heck else could a high school math curriculum possibly contain, except algebra, geometry, etc?
According to your line of reasoning, if my child's college application shows an excellent score on the math portion of the SAT and good grades in AP Calculus B/C and AP Statistics, the admissions committee will look at her application and see that in her freshman and sophomore years in high school she took courses named "Math" rather than "Algebra" etc. and they'll say "OMG! This applicant has not learned any high school math!"
If the admissions process is that witless, it couldn't be a desirable institution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
I have no objection to attempts to introduce advanced math concepts at an earlier age. I'm fine with that. I'm also fine with teaching them problem solving skills. But all of that will be utterly pointless if the students can't add, subtract, multiply, and divide. Without the fundamentals, everything else is wasted effort. Thus my comment about summer reviews with a solid and traditional curriculum, what you would call "old-fashioned" and "unprogressive".
I've been writing based on my child's experience of the new curriculum for middle and high schools. My child's class (class of 2012) is the first class on the new curriculum, starting in 6th grade. Your comments about the importance of basic arithmetic skills would apply to the elementary curriculum. Indeed, if kids don't have basic arithmetic down by middle school, there's no hope of moving on into algebra. Your comments about what you imagine my views to be, indicate to me that you're imagining I'm a proponent of the 1960s "new math" approach for elementary grades. You are completely mistaken. I have no knowledge of what curriculum revisions may be under way for elementary grades, but I certainly hope they do not involve reduced attention to times tables, etc.
Supporting math curriculum improvement in this new century does not equal wanting to revisit the 1960s "new math" experience.
Everyone knows there were problems with 1960s "new math". But does this unfortunate history mean that it is never appropriate to make any change to any state math curriculum, ever again?
Of course not. Today everyone knows there were problems with "new math". But in the 60s everyone was sure that it was a better approach to teaching math than traditional methods. So what curriculum did they use in the 70s? Or in the 80s? Today some are certain that integrated math is a better method than what we were using a decade ago. How can we be sure? Truth: we can't. Only time and experience will tell. These are the hazards of being early adopters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainyRainyDay
Georgia's new math curriculum is not a 1960s "new math" curriculum;
I never said it was. I am drawing a parallel, and I am raising a concern that the state has rushed in to this too quickly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainyRainyDay
It did seem to be widely thought (by parents too) that the previous curriculum was not serving Georgia students particularly well, and there was room for improvement.
Was the curriculum at fault? Or was it merely its implementation. Is changing the curriculum really going to help teachers teach better? Or will it be yet another source of confusion for them? I honestly don't know what efforts there have been to educate the educators on this curriculum. Is there assurance that teachers have received the training and information necessary to implement the curriculum correctly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainyRainyDay
I've heard this argument before, and it really amazes me.
It amazes you? Really? You're surprised that early adoption of something new means those unfamiliar with it won't understand it? You expect every college and university throughout the country to know the specifics of every curriculum adopted by every state for every subject? Seriously? Because it sure seems that's what you are expecting. Or is Georgia special?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainyRainyDay
because then we can't point to whole-year courses named Algebra, Geometry, etc., which would cause college admissions committees to conclude that students from Georgia do not study algebra, geometry, etc. What a bizarre priority - we can't improve the courses because we have to keep the course names the same, so college admissions committees don't get confused? For Pete's sake, what in heck else could a high school math curriculum possibly contain, except algebra, geometry, etc?
How about "applied math". Not every math class taught in high school contains advanced subjects. How would someone unfamiliar with Georgia's curriculum draw a distinction between college-prep math and applied math courses from just a name like "Math I" or "Math IV". The name becomes meaningless and you need a key to decipher it.
You are correct that a transcript with AP calculus classes on it will remove any doubt about the student's level of knowledge. But AP classes should not be a requirement for successful admission to college.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainyRainyDay
Your comments about what you imagine my views to be, indicate to me that you're imagining I'm a proponent of the 1960s "new math" approach for elementary grades. You are completely mistaken.
No, you are mistaken. I did not state nor intended to imply any association between you and new math. That would be utterly silly on my part since you never mentioned it until I did. Don't draw preposterous conclusions then blame me for them.
I see parallels between 60s new math and the current Georgia math curriculum. Not in the details of the curriculum itself, but in the way it was quickly adopted, in the way it is being readily accepted as the savior of our mathematics educational problems, and in the radical shift from past methods in to territory that is, at least in this country, mostly unproven.
I sincerely hope that the BoE did its homework on this one. I hope they firmly established that the root cause of the problem was the curriculum itself. Because otherwise this change will have little positive impact.
Unfortunately only time will tell if this was the right thing or just another fad.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
