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.
Oh, I hate to use the word undesirable for Lisle high school. Their average PSAE score is only 66 (many more IL high schools are above that). Their ACT was 22.4 (This is from 08-09 data). Nearby Naperville has a district composite score of 78 and ACT 25. So, for me who is trying to figure out where to live sees that a nearby city has much better scores, would look toward that district. Especially when I noticed that the taxes in Lisle were just as bad. Mind you, I haven't seen either city yet, talked to the schools yet, etc. I am just looking at scores to bring down the list of places I want to start looking seriously at.
Yep, we can't stand Everyday Math. I was afraid to be the first to bring it up, that thread could go on forever!
Agree... There are plenty of very long threads on this topic on the Education forum.
Just want to note though that, if your child qualifies for a gifted math program, they may use a curriculum that is different from the district's adopted math program. E.g. Our kids used a traditional math program in gifted math while the rest of the school used Everyday Math.
Probably driven more by cranky over involved helicopter parents than actual research...
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCUBS1
Agree... There are plenty of very long threads on this topic on the Education forum.
Just want to note though that, if your child qualifies for a gifted math program, they may use a curriculum that is different from the district's adopted math program. E.g. Our kids used a traditional math program in gifted math while the rest of the school used Everyday Math.
Most "traditional" math programs are huge on drills and memorization which is completely counter to research that shows talented students do better with more open ended challenges in math.
I have no problem with "homeschoolers" using methods from a century ago because their kids will probably be sheltered / shepherded into something where advanced math is not a big part of their life but the thought that "gifted" kids would be in that kind of environment is disturbing.
I am sure there are tremendous numbers of teachers that are underprepared and giving them insufficient support to use a well designed, research based math program serves no one. Allowing parents to bully educators into using some ancient math program because "it was good enough me" ignores the reality that MOST fields have seen the benefits of higher math.
A few decades ago the thought that statistical analysis using differential equations / integral calculus would be fundamental to everything from merchandising grocery products to improving patient care to stock portfolio design was fantasy. Software from companies like Wolfram, SAS, SPSSX and others is now standard off the shelf stuff.
If you want to pretend Little House on the Prairie is good enough for your home schoolers it is one thing, but to think that the brightest kids in a school are going to benefit from learning' ciphering' the same way half pint did...
We were in a district that uses Everyday Math but it was significantly supplemented. And overall, some of the techniques inherent in the program are beneficial to mathematically gifted kids. I'd say it's really all about the individual classroom implementation and teacher level of competency in mathematics that makes all the difference.
And honestly, if you have mathematically gifted kids (we have two that are), you already know that you will need to do a lot of supplementing and finding additional opportunities (like math camps and out of level classes) to meet their needs. If you are concerned about the spiral approach being harmful for your children's learning, you might want to seriously consider other alternatives to nearly any math program available. Many of them have adopted this approach to varying degrees.
Oh, I hate to use the word undesirable for Lisle high school. Their average PSAE score is only 66 (many more IL high schools are above that). Their ACT was 22.4 (This is from 08-09 data). Nearby Naperville has a district composite score of 78 and ACT 25. So, for me who is trying to figure out where to live sees that a nearby city has much better scores, would look toward that district. Especially when I noticed that the taxes in Lisle were just as bad. Mind you, I haven't seen either city yet, talked to the schools yet, etc. I am just looking at scores to bring down the list of places I want to start looking seriously at.
Based on scores AND curriculum I would have no issues sending my child to Naperville High Schools. But only the future will tell if I "did wrong" by my child by not moving into a district like Stevenson, New Trier, Glenbrook or Deerfield.
Most "traditional" math programs are huge on drills and memorization which is completely counter to research that shows talented students do better with more open ended challenges in math.
I have no problem with "homeschoolers" using methods from a century ago because their kids will probably be sheltered / shepherded into something where advanced math is not a big part of their life but the thought that "gifted" kids would be in that kind of environment is disturbing.
I am sure there are tremendous numbers of teachers that are underprepared and giving them insufficient support to use a well designed, research based math program serves no one. Allowing parents to bully educators into using some ancient math program because "it was good enough me" ignores the reality that MOST fields have seen the benefits of higher math.
A few decades ago the thought that statistical analysis using differential equations / integral calculus would be fundamental to everything from merchandising grocery products to improving patient care to stock portfolio design was fantasy. Software from companies like Wolfram, SAS, SPSSX and others is now standard off the shelf stuff.
If you want to pretend Little House on the Prairie is good enough for your home schoolers it is one thing, but to think that the brightest kids in a school are going to benefit from learning' ciphering' the same way half pint did...
I hate to derail this thread with a whole new conversation on Math methods as I've made many posts on this subject on the Education forum.... And why the off-topic, attack rant on homeschooling and cranky parents?
If a parent is concerned about a math program, perhaps they are not cranky, helicopter parents or bullies. Perhaps they have some knowledge or expertise in the area and want to partner with their teacher/school to find the best approach for their child. There are many parents who have taken much higher level math courses compared to the very minimal math required for most elementary education majors (one reason I believe teacher subject-specialization should begin before middle school).
And did anyone on this thread even mention homeschooling? Our kids are not homeschooled and I find it surprising that you make such sweeping judgments about homeschoolers on a thread that has nothing to do with the topic.
Drills may be a component of any math program and are used to supplement both "Traditional" and "Everyday" math programs.
Our school's gifted program is a very balanced combination of some math drills (in the elem years), open-ended problem solving, CML and Math Olympiad competition, gaming, and a current, "traditional" math textbook. By "traditional", I mean a program that differs from Everyday Math's over-reliance (IMO) on language-based instruction, looping methods, manipulatives/visuals, ball-park estimates, and alternate, less-efficient solution methods.
Strong natl. test results indicate this program is working very well for our school. But I am basing my educated opinion on what I feel is the best fit for my particular children. I have no idea what instructional methods would work best for Laura Ingalls, nor do I care....
Based on scores AND curriculum I would have no issues sending my child to Naperville High Schools. But only the future will tell if I "did wrong" by my child by not moving into a district like Stevenson, New Trier, Glenbrook or Deerfield.
How will you ever know if you "did wrong by your child?" How will you ever know what may have happened in another school? Attendance at Stevenson is no guarantee to the Ivy League, which itself is no guarantee of any kind of success in life.
Perhaps attendance at one of the elite private schools (Lab, Francis Parker, Latin) might be a better option, if you're trying to guarantee some kind of outcome. Becoming really good friends with people that are already super-successful is probably a better path to success than going to Naperville Central.
If your family is friends with a guy that is CEO of a IT company downtown because your kid is at Francis Parker, your kid will benefit much more than being friends with a guy that works at Lucent because your kid goes to Naperville Central.
We were in a district that uses Everyday Math but it was significantly supplemented. And overall, some of the techniques inherent in the program are beneficial to mathematically gifted kids. I'd say it's really all about the individual classroom implementation and teacher level of competency in mathematics that makes all the difference.
And honestly, if you have mathematically gifted kids (we have two that are), you already know that you will need to do a lot of supplementing and finding additional opportunities (like math camps and out of level classes) to meet their needs. If you are concerned about the spiral approach being harmful for your children's learning, you might want to seriously consider other alternatives to nearly any math program available. Many of them have adopted this approach to varying degrees.
Agree with most of your post especially the bolded sentences. Will only add that other research has found that highly gifted kids may find that Everyday Math is not nearly advanced enough (even with Extension Activities). Plenty of gifted organizations, prominent mathematicians/scientists, Nobel Laureates, and various states have rejected this program for these reasons....
However, as you pointed out, a good teacher/school/parent can always supplement any program and achieve very positive results.
I think one thing is for certain... I wish that all states had the same testing across the board. It would make moving from one state to the next so much easier. I could care less if the high school ACT scores were off by a few points, because I do believe that parenting, teachers, kids, and so much more feed into how well your child will do. But it is the drop in the standarized test from elementary/middle to high school that had me stumped. If those level tests were the same from state to state (maybe IL tests are really hard), it would take the guess work out.
So... You're looking at local/state elementary/middle school tests (e.g. ISAT) versus a nationally normed test (e.g. ACT). Is that correct? Just curious, do you see any trend in IL. Math test results as compared to other states? Do you believe our nearly state-wide adoption of an elementary Everyday Math platform may contribute toward poorer performance on later H.S. ACT math/science scores as compared to states that have rejected this program? I have no idea whether or not this is the case, just curious if you (or others) found any correlation.
Oh my goodness.. I am just looking at scores in addition to a lot of other important issues (class size, curriculum, community, etc) to try and help me "find" a great suburb to move to. I am not the math genius that my husband is. I do know we would like to avoid everyday math for our own reasons (one reason we are glad we are at a private school right now - when kids graduate from this school they are 1- 1.5 grades ahead in math than the awesome public school that is in the top 3% of the nation that uses everyday math). That being said, if we find a great school that seems to "fit" our needs, and they use everyday math, so be it. Clearly, you just can't compare ACT scores across states and says ah... this state is stronger. They are even too many variables in that (some schools make all kids take them, so don't, etc).
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.
Probably driven more by cranky over involved helicopter parents than actual research...
