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.
This is wrong. Kids need to progress on their own level or they will get bored and lose interest in academics altogether.
In an effort to obtain political correctness they are bringing everyone down to the level of a low achiever rather than doing what they can to raise that low achiever up.
Im really shocked. This isnt how it was when I went to school in VA, and I graduated from a US Blue Ribbon public school. I wonder if that designation will exist anymore now that they figure they need to punish people for applying themselves more to their studies.
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
13,076 posts, read 7,515,583 times
Reputation: 9798
Quote:
Originally Posted by ComeCloser
This is wrong. Kids need to progress on their own level or they will get bored and lose interest in academics altogether.
In an effort to obtain political correctness they are bringing everyone down to the level of a low achiever rather than doing what they can to raise that low achiever up.
Im really shocked. This isnt how it was when I went to school in VA, and I graduated from a US Blue Ribbon public school. I wonder if that designation will exist anymore now that they figure they need to punish people for applying themselves more to their studies.
{i have dexlexia and my grammer and spelling is not always correct}
At what level should a private or public education provide services for the either ends of the Bell?
How does USA get enough prepared technical people?
Why not get the help for those who are struggling in math and need some tutoring. It makes no sense to punish those who might have an aptitude for math and are ready for a more challenging curriculum. What are they doing about AP classes? Are those dumped too. This setting the bar low in the name of equality is nonsensical. Everyone has different strengths and weaknesses. That will never change. And not everyone has to aspire to take calculus in 8th grade. But punishing those who are ready and motivated to challenge themselves is pure insanity.
But isn't making change something like a 3rd grade problem? Why would high school math be worried about making change? That's what concerns me is we keep dumbing things down. If people are really unable to count change by high school, then should they not be kept back and instead focus high school math on those who are capable of doing it?
I don't know that it's accurate that we keep dumbing things down. When I was in high school back in the 1960s, there were two tracks. In one track there was basic 9th grade math, in the other there was algebra, followed by geometry in the 10th grade. At the middle school where I was principal in Virginia, as late as 2008, half of our students completed those courses (and beyond) in the 7th and 8th grade, and we even had 6th graders from the feeder elementary school reporting to our school for the first period to take our highest level math courses. We also had a school for science and technology in our system.
I don't have a problem with keeping students back if they're not learning appropriately. And I'm not saying that all schools/school systems are equal. But I do think this charge of dumbing things down is applied too broadly. And I think that sometimes we overstate the need for all students to take higher level mathematics.
That's not to say I'm in favor of the proposal before us now. School systems should have the freedom to provide math courses at whatever levels the students need.
Probably because they got handed calculators in 6th grade so their brains didn't have to think.
There are "tools" and there are "crutches".
I think that's a valid point. There's too much punching things into advanced calculators and computers, and that that eliminates the need to understand the process.
What constitutes a "real-life problem" though? Can you give examples?
Pretty much no one "needs" to read Shakespeare or use Shakespearean era vocabulary and grammar at any point in their life, ever. Does that mean that Shakespeare has no place in an English curriculum?
To boot everyone uses algebraic concepts regularly.
I don't know that it's accurate that we keep dumbing things down. When I was in high school back in the 1960s, there were two tracks. In one track there was basic 9th grade math, in the other there was algebra, followed by geometry in the 10th grade. At the middle school where I was principal in Virginia, as late as 2008, half of our students completed those courses (and beyond) in the 7th and 8th grade, and we even had 6th graders from the feeder elementary school reporting to our school for the first period to take our highest level math courses. We also had a school for science and technology in our system.
I don't have a problem with keeping students back if they're not learning appropriately. And I'm not saying that all schools/school systems are equal. But I do think this charge of dumbing things down is applied too broadly. And I think that sometimes we overstate the need for all students to take higher level mathematics.
That's not to say I'm in favor of the proposal before us now. School systems should have the freedom to provide math courses at whatever levels the students need.
What are your thoughts on the lack of reading in schools today. Fifty years ago, we did a lot of reading in school. Everyone in my district read "The Merchant of Venice" and "MacBeth." I could probably list a dozen other books such as "Silas Marner," "Johnny Tremaine," "The Yearling," etc. We were assigned chapters to read in science, history, and English classes. I think many students today can graduate high school without ever having reading an entire book or a chapter of a textbook.
We carried books home in the old days. Today, students watch the video of the book in class, so they don't have to read it. They even find watching the movie to be difficult.
I knew many would go into, "circle the wagons/no problem here mode."
A few related bits are glaring after 10 minutes of fair-minded reading:
1). The VA. Ed. people floated a number of ideas looking for pain points and I'm sure areas of board agreement. Quasi-governmental agencies do this all the time. Part of the marketing is giving themselves a pass.......oh don't worry we are only considering making minor adjustments well in the future.
2). The VA. Ed. people note, source and link, "The Charles A. Dana Center" at The University of Texas as the primary supporting academic force behind these proposed changes......the blueprint provider if you will.
I'd ask everyone interested to read up on the The Dana Center including it's marketing page.
Here are some inarguable facts about Dana:
1). The institution is far left of political center. Its implied mission is to dive equity, equality of outcomes if you will, in high school and college math. They deserve credit for being very honest, even explicit, about this.
1a). As with many, Dana sees disparate math outcomes per various cadres under several bright lights A). most students don't really need algebra or calculus anyway so let's minimize both in all ways that we can. B). interleaving with A. math isn't taught evenly across the various groups adding fuel to the minimization ethos. C). math is unfairly used as a college admissions filter - so let's minimize some more D). math is unfairly used as a filter per various disciplines within academia so let's minimize math exposure even in college.
Facts:
*Dana pressures colleges and high schools to eliminate, "algebra" per se as a requirement for graduation - a core component if you will........actively celebrating when a college removes college algebra as core component. Further, at the HS level Dana's suggested curriculum virtually eliminates all elements of calculus and very significant portions of what most think of as high school algebra for the overwhelming majority of students.
*Dana pressures middle and high schools to start all kids at the same math class level, usually in a locked three year progression. One need not be a Newtonian disciple to see those restrictions reduce the number of students desiring higher end math later.
*Dana, again to their credit - behind all the softening of position marketing - is quite honest that they want to minimize and even remove more challenging math requirements and exposure across HS and college for social engineering/equity reasons.
______
It's the old, "subtle/soft racism of reduced exceptions." Against the known that our students are already being bested in math by students from many countries.
Many small-l liberals, softer side academics etc. love to prattle on about, "critical thinking" implying the notion that those strong in math and science are diminished in that way when the opposite is true. Our citizenry needs more math not less.
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.
