|
SedanChair posted:It sounds more like they are no longer teaching a class called "Algebra" and are instead actually trying to teach the concepts at an earlier age. Moron parents see this and blurt out "where's algebra??" It's in math. Yeah that's how New York did it for a hot minute. It was like Math I-III but literally everyone including teachers called them algebra, geometry, and trig, because that's what they were.
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 17:36 |
|
|
asdf32 posted:Generally wrong. I'll repeat the analogy from above: math to science and engineering is like spelling to literature. Serious question, not an ad hominem, what is the highest level of math education you completed because dear lord you do not know anything e: like, you have to understand the mechanics of the math to even use a graphing calculator properly
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 07:13
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:Serious question, not an ad hominem, what is the highest level of math education you completed because dear lord you do not know anything Yeah you literally cannot just plug poo poo in blindly unless you just want to make pretty lines, you have to at least understand what the various things you're plugging in mean and what it should give you as a result Unless all you want is to look at the results tables I guess
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 07:16
|
|
|
PERPETUAL IDIOT posted:You're fighting against an impoverished notion of math and algebra. You're confusing the study of those things, which are incredibly rich, worthwhile subjects, with the study of specific algorithms and rote memorization that you were given in school. There's no reason why it has to be that way. asdf32 posted:Generally wrong. I'll repeat the analogy from above: math to science and engineering is like spelling to literature. Yashichi posted:I'm not sure why the course of action is to pretend all students are equal because racists might abuse the system. Solkanar512 posted:The whole "teach other students" thing is legit... Solkanar512 posted:It's the "we're going to remove advanced classes all together for social justice reasons, so no honors courses either" that bother me. Miss-Bomarc fucked around with this message at 07:20 on Sep 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 07:17
|
|
|
Yashichi posted:By the phrasing of the article, it seems like the school is keeping the common algebra 1/algebra 2/geometry/precalculus setup, but they're delaying algebra 1 to 9th grade for all students. That means they won't see calculus in high school unless they are extremely motivated to make it happen. Algebra to calculus is a bigger jump than middle school pre-algebra to algebra, and anecdotally I've noticed that spending a year on calculus in high school makes it easier in college. If ~10% of students are fully ready for algebra in 8th grade and they have to wait a year, that's a wasted opportunity to get them to where they could be. In the recording I linked, they also talked about Algebra taking two years to complete. It's around 3:50 if you'd like to hear it for yourself. SedanChair posted:No I was specifically responding to the article talking about "super-smart kids." The author/parents were labeling students who are taking advanced math as "super-smart". It's clear and there's no need to try and score points by being disingenuous. I get that you like being edgy as gently caress and whatnot, but how can you say that "you had enough" when all the folks with specialized degrees keep raising their hands and saying, "No, we actually need Calculus before we hit college"? Furthermore, by taking the ability to have those classes early, you're preventing the very students (with very few advantages) from accessing that knowledge as well. I came from a lower middle class family, I qualified for subsidized school lunch. I went to a poor high school. I have learning disabilities. Because I had access to advanced classes like these, and a great support structure to go with, I was able to make it into an incredible college and it's paid huge dividends ever since. The last thing I want to see is that ladder pulled up from those who come after me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:You are one dumb motherfucker Oh my, is this your first dance with asdf?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 07:39
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Generally wrong. I'll repeat the analogy from above: math to science and engineering is like spelling to literature. You've got a point, and if you had spent any more time trying to spell it would have taken valuable focus away from learning how to write. You might have ended up only being able to write at an 8th grade level.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 07:48
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Generally wrong. I'll repeat the analogy from above: math to science and engineering is like spelling to literature.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 08:14
|
|
|
Well, if anyone's curious, the San Francisco Unified actually has their math curriculum online here. More specifically, the proposed sequence of classes is here. Of note, at the high school level, it's Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II or Algebra II + Pre-calc, and then either AP Calculus, AP Stats, or Pre-calc. Actually looks pretty similar to my high school's mathematics curriculum. Edit: After looking at Algebra I, I take that back. If I'm reading it right, they're doing linear programming in that class. I think I hit that ... second year in college or something. moebius2778 fucked around with this message at 08:33 on Sep 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 08:23
|
|
|
moebius2778 posted:Edit: After looking at Algebra I, I take that back. If I'm reading it right, they're doing linear programming in that class. I think I hit that ... second year in college or something. Graphing two or three linear inequalities is not exactly rocket science. It's not as if they are learning the simplex method.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 08:42
|
|
|
wiregrind posted:Helping more people pass public highschool by loosening up math makes a deeper social inequality further down the line when only people who could afford private education can keep up with University. It will probably help maintain a tight elite of high-class-only graduates. It's not 'loosening up math', though. Again, I think that this pedagogy will produce better results. So do the people implementing it. Solkanar512 posted:The article and more detailed recording explicitly talks about how the special math classes will no longer be offered. Thus, while you and I both agree that the class should be there, it won't be. Furthermore, the same reasoning that is removing such math classes is also removing honors classes. First, I think they should have the class for political reasons, because people who don't understand the pedagogy will kick up a fuss. quote:As far as the AP/recorders comment, many schools treat AP/IB as an "honors" type class, so for the same reasons I seem them likely to go. The recorders comment is similar - some schools introduce younger kids to recorders as a class, then later on let them choose to join orchestra or band - the latter being the "more advanced" course in comparison. Okay, are you mocking yourself then, because obviously they're not going to make kids stick with recorders so you realized that no, they're not cancelling AP classes and that you're being silly, or what? blah_blah posted:You go to a bad school if there aren't enough people taking Algebra I in 9th grade to make up a whole class. At the school I went to during 9th grade (before I moved back to Canada), the solid students were in Geometry in 9th grade, the really good ones were in Algebra II, and there were a handful of people in Pre-Calculus and Calculus AB as freshman. This was a solid school in an upper middle-class area, but not a magnet school or anything like that. I went to a small, rather than a bad, school. And no, it's not going to make it impossible to get into STEM programs. You can still take calculus, and you can get into STEM programs having never taken calculus. This level of freakout is so weird.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 12:02
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Okay, are you mocking yourself then, because obviously they're not going to make kids stick with recorders so you realized that no, they're not cancelling AP classes and that you're being silly, or what? It's a slight bit of hyperbole based on the stated idea that having advanced classes is "tracking" and thus such classes need to be removed. In the same way, one could wonder about Varsity/JV sports. Take a breath, I'm not trying to pull anything here. Also, my alma mater required a year of Calculus for everyone as an admission requirement, and you're really downplaying how fundamentally important that material is. Being able to take it earlier than senior year is a huge benefit that you seem to be dismissing out of hand for reasons I don't fully understand.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 12:35
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:It's a slight bit of hyperbole based on the stated idea that having advanced classes is "tracking" and thus such classes need to be removed. In the same way, one could wonder about Varsity/JV sports. Take a breath, I'm not trying to pull anything here. Then we can place an emphasis on students taking a couple of years of Gen Eds at a local community college to lessen the time spent at expensive private schools.There they can take Calculus, college-level science, writing, etc, before going on to said private schools to take the required classes for their major. This will save the student money, allow high schools to better reach kids lower on the high school food chain, and allowing students coming out of high school a few years of being an adult to potentially explore options for future careers, instead of being shuttled from advanced classes in high school to a college that will potentially put them $30,000 in debt before they even have an idea of what they want to actually study.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 12:40
|
|
|
blah_blah posted:You go to a bad school if there aren't enough people taking Algebra I in 9th grade to make up a whole class. At the school I went to during 9th grade (before I moved back to Canada), the solid students were in Geometry in 9th grade, the really good ones were in Algebra II, and there were a handful of people in Pre-Calculus and Calculus AB as freshman. This was a solid school in an upper middle-class area, but not a magnet school or anything like that. The topic is specifically about having Algebra I in 9th grade though?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 12:47
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:Then we can place an emphasis on students taking a couple of years of Gen Eds at a local community college to lessen the time spent at expensive private schools.There they can take Calculus, college-level science, writing, etc, before going on to said private schools to take the required classes for their major. This will save the student money, allow high schools to better reach kids lower on the high school food chain, and allowing students coming out of high school a few years of being an adult to potentially explore options for future careers, instead of being shuttled from advanced classes in high school to a college that will potentially put them $30,000 in debt before they even have an idea of what they want to actually study. Uh, if we're talking AP/IB, those credits tend to transfer anyway. My school did both actually. Having the flexibility makes it easier for students from a variety of backgrounds to have access to these types of courses. So how is it that offering the advanced courses needlessly takes away from kids who are lower on the food chain that sending high school students to community college won't? Which students do you mean - those who are poor, minorities, have learning disabilities, are behind academically, what exactly?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 12:52
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Uh, if we're talking AP/IB, those credits tend to transfer anyway. My school did both actually. Having the flexibility makes it easier for students from a variety of backgrounds to have access to these types of courses. You're not sending them to community college in place of high school, you're sending them in place of the first two years of college. As for the second question, all of the above, really. My dream choice would be a complete overhaul of how grade school works, teaching everything earlier and more integrated at a younger age, which is what common core is trying to get to with math, and removing the need for a liberal arts education entirely, thus turning college back into something that you go to with the intent of specializing in a particular field. This will either increase the capabilities of college students looking for jobs, or keep them in school for less time, thus giving them more time to earn money, and less debt. If you couple that with teaching the GenEd portion of a Liberal Arts degree in high school, that means that kids that might not make it to college right now would have stronger educations coming out of high school, and for kids that might not benefit from a college education they're "tracked" into currently will save a lot of time and money. This also creates more opportunities for kids of different backgrounds, aptitudes and cultures to work together, and you can forge greater connections between kids who might not otherwise have had any contact at all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 13:12
|
|
|
LookingGodIntheEye posted:What help is a computer or calculator if you don't even understand what you are doing or what results you get, especially at higher levels of education? So what do you think I'm saying? What I'm trying to say is that the emphasis should be entirely on what you're pointing out: knowing what to put into the calculator and knowing what to do with the result. This means an emphasis on translating real life problems into a polynomial and less emphasis (perhaps nearly none) on the procedure for factoring them. In the bigger picture I think higher level math like calculus, differential equations and statistics should be pushed earlier in the curriculum and given to more students where it directly benefits physics and science. Understanding how 1/2MV^2 (energy in a moving object) follows from calculus, or how to map a falling ball into a differential equation shouldn't be AP or college level education. We make it that because of the uneccesary baggage that gates math education at every step. asdf32 fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Sep 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
All I know about math is that my college calc class did not prepare me for my college discrete math class.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:Serious question, not an ad hominem, what is the highest level of math education you completed because dear lord you do not know anything Yea I have to imagine these posters never got very far in math given the things they are saying. I think the huge difference comes from people that just took math because they had to (and sucked at it) vs. the people who actually need to use math in their careers. tsa fucked around with this message at 16:48 on Sep 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
The American math curriculum is so strangely rigid, coming from a foreign perspective. pre-Algebra, Algebra-I, pre-Calculus, Calculus I, Geometry etc etc. So many fields of mathematics are interrelated, teaching them in such a segregated way is very strange (at the low introductory level e.g. all of high school).
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:
Not any good school you can't, or rather it would be incredibly hard. Your STEM program was probably pretty terrible if most people were still in calc I as freshman, any decent school is going to have most their students already out of Calc II just going in. Shakugan posted:The American math curriculum is so strangely rigid, coming from a foreign perspective. You do learn about the inter-relations, you would know that if you actually attended school here. Focusing on one thing as a primary topic is the best way to educate though, it's very difficult for people just learning this stuff to appreciate the relations without having a solid base.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 16:51
|
|
|
Shakugan posted:So many fields of mathematics are interrelated, teaching them in such a segregated way is very strange (at the low introductory level e.g. all of high school). They do interrelate and are taught as such, they just don't specify that on the course name. tsa posted:Not any good school you can't, or rather it would be incredibly hard. Your STEM program was probably pretty terrible if most people were still in calc I as freshman, any decent school is going to have most their students already out of Calc II just going in. No, schools often recommend you retake Calculus in college (the real reason is to get their  but it's fairly common).
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
I have literally never heard of that, again I'm talking about top programs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
tsa posted:You do learn about the inter-relations, you would know that if you actually attended school here. Focusing on one thing as a primary topic is the best way to educate though, it's very difficult for people just learning this stuff to appreciate the relations without having a solid base. Point being that it often makes sense to spend a small amount of time developing skills in one area of maths, go to another topic, spend a small amount of time developing skills in that area, return to the first area applying skills from the second for further development etc. Even if aspects of other classes are brought in, I don't get the impression that an algebra class pauses algebra content to spend time on geometry content that'll be relevant etc. If that's a wrong impression, well then the class names are stupid  A solid base is super important, but I think that base should be developed in parallel rather than sequentially.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:It's a slight bit of hyperbole based on the stated idea that having advanced classes is "tracking" and thus such classes need to be removed. In the same way, one could wonder about Varsity/JV sports. Take a breath, I'm not trying to pull anything here. The person who is saying, based on nothing at all, that they're removing AP classes is the one who needs to take a breath. Likewise the babbling about recorders. quote:Also, my alma mater required a year of Calculus for everyone as an admission requirement, and you're really downplaying how fundamentally important that material is. Being able to take it earlier than senior year is a huge benefit that you seem to be dismissing out of hand for reasons I don't fully understand. What alma mater is that? And again, the reason I'm disagreeing is because of a pedagogy that says that it is better to get advanced students to teach other students than to push them ahead by a year. They gain more skills, retain more, and later mastery comes easier because they have to break down the concepts and communicate them. tsa posted:Not any good school you can't, or rather it would be incredibly hard. Your STEM program was probably pretty terrible if most people were still in calc I as freshman, any decent school is going to have most their students already out of Calc II just going in. Let's see if your claim holds true. Uchicago: http://collegecatalog.uchicago.edu/thecollege/mathematics/ Completely possible to complete by taking Calculus I in the first year. Possible to get a BS in mathematics while never going beyond Calc 2. MIT: Can take calc as a freshmen, calc 2/3 next semester, don't need to go beyond that for most degrees. Princeton: This one you're right about! It looks like it would be very hard to complete a math degree there without coming in already with calculus. A very heavy calc program compared to others. UC-Berkeley: https://math.berkeley.edu/programs/undergraduate/major/pure Completely easy to take calc 1 as a freshman and get a math major. You only even need a C average in it, too. While you're almost certainly right that most of the entering students are beyond Calc I on entry, it wouldn't be 'incredibly hard' to get a math degree while starting with Calc I at any of these schools. And again, the progression in California allows the students to do Calc I as seniors so this isn't even a meaningful objection.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
well clearly modern college programs are designed for mental untermenschen so unlike brave stem heroes like me
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:It's not 'loosening up math', though. Again, I think that this pedagogy will produce better results. So do the people implementing it. It removes meritocracy from schools and leaves anyone who can't afford choice at a disasvantage. I've read people in the thread who seem to be angry at parents and children who want to excel in their studies in public schools. So I will refer to these parents as arrogant assholes: If the few assholes who dare think they can be smart at public schools end up learning less because of an institutional reform, the only reason they will be at a disadvantage later on is because they couldn't afford a private school. It only affects arrogant, poor people who think they can learn but can't afford it. It affects people solely based on income. Or maybe the reform works great and it will not affect students later in college. Maybe checking how similar reforms went for other countries would give some insight. wiregrind fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Sep 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
and if there's anything that deffo benefits the disadvantaged in society, it's the notion of  meritocracy
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
wiregrind posted:I also want to think that every reform in education will help students. However these reforms might be made to improve how many people graduate highschool and change those numbers first and foremost, while leaving the question of how well they will do later as unimportant or trivial. They might. Why not look into it and see? If you do, you'll see the pedagogy does indeed claim, as I have been saying, that teaching fellow students, as an advanced students, leads to good educational outcomes for those advanced students. As I look into it more, though, it turns out that common core encourages grouping advanced students together within the class more than it does having them teach other students. quote:If the few assholes who dare think they can be smart at public schools end up learning less because of an institutional reform, the only reason those jerks will be at a disadvantage later on is because they couldn't afford a private school. It only affects arrogant, poor assholes who think they can learn but can't afford it. Making a cross-country comparison would be daunting, because reform involves a before and after; we can find places that have similar stuff to common core, but it's not going to be possible to find places that made a very similar transition. Not sure why you're going on about assholes and arrogance. Let's look what the national association for gifted children says: http://www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources/timely-topics/common-core-state-standards-national-science-0 They're remarkably aplomb about it, despite being a group that holds that advanced classes are actually great and cool. The most they say is that if you go strictly according to CC with no effort to do anything for gifted kids, then it can cheap them--as is the case today, with state curriculums. They point out that CC actually sets the stage for gifted education well: quote:What is the Research Support for Differentiating the Common Core State Standards for Gifted Learners? http://www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources/timely-topics/common-core-state-standards-national-science-0#sthash.rlneKFNl.dpuf Finally, the reasons for dropping out of school usually have very little to do with the difficulty of the curriculum. Economic reasons are the primary motivator, with 'social' reasons coming after, and the curricular stuff is mostly related to engagement rather than difficulty.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
In a general sense everything you learn in high school is purely mechanics and heavily interferes with the theoretical language that advanced math actually brings. Solving problems != arriving at an inescapable conclusion. Producing armadas of results oriented students to get into STEM programs who expect only to solve problems makes them essentially useless as researchers until you reteach them. e: Just read anything off of arXiv and say if high school math is relevant at all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:They might. Why not look into it and see? If you do, you'll see the pedagogy does indeed claim, as I have been saying, that teaching fellow students, as an advanced students, leads to good educational outcomes for those advanced students. As I look into it more, though, it turns out that common core encourages grouping advanced students together within the class more than it does having them teach other students. I think there's a right way and a wrong way to handle this concept, having seen it done very well and very poorly both. Without proper instruction in pedagogical techniques, there's some things amateur tutors just won't be able to get across to lower-performing students, especially if those students are missing certain fundamental concepts already, and it's an exercise in frustration for everyone to try. On the other hand, getting more advanced students to walk through their problem-solving process on certain questions in front of the class, for example, makes a lot of sense and I think it's helpful for everyone. Doing so certainly solidified my understanding of a lot of concepts, though this was typically in classes where everyone had a fairly consistent level of baseline knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I think there's a right way and a wrong way to handle this concept, having seen it done very well and very poorly both. Without proper instruction in pedagogical techniques, there's some things amateur tutors just won't be able to get across to lower-performing students, especially if those students are missing certain fundamental concepts already, and it's an exercise in frustration for everyone to try. Yeah, any pedagogy is going to fail with inadequate instruction. Implementing new stuff and just leaving the teachers to adapt sucks, and happens too often.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
I don't see anything particularly wrong in the OP? A course called Algebra I is gonna get taken off because it was apparently taught in an extremely lovely way. Its concepts will be integrated into math across the various school grades and a new course called Algebra I will be made in secondary school (which is apprently more of a geometry course but eh)
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Not sure why you're going on about assholes and arrogance. In my posts I was trying to guess what problems the reform could have, but the information you posted shows that most of my points (not stopping ambitious children, or the importance of taking economical factors into account) are already being addressed by national organisms.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
tsa posted:I have literally never heard of that, again I'm talking about top programs. When you refer to STEM, what are you actually referring to because you sure as hell aren't referring to what it traditionally has meant.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
"Top programs" probably don't account for more than single-digit percentages of all STEM students in the US, so it's basically irrelevant. Some random state university and MIT are two entirely different animals
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:"Top programs" probably don't account for more than single-digit percentages of all STEM students in the US, so it's basically irrelevant. Some random state university and MIT are two entirely different animals And at MIT it's totally feasible to take Calc I as a freshman and get a math BS.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:"Top programs" probably don't account for more than single-digit percentages of all STEM students in the US, so it's basically irrelevant. Some random state university and MIT are two entirely different animals Even then, the idea that no top schools are accepting Biology or Chemistry students because they haven't taken Calc is laughable. I could only see this possibly being an issue for engineering students at the few most competitive programs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
moebius2778 posted:Well, if anyone's curious, the San Francisco Unified actually has their math curriculum online here. More specifically, the proposed sequence of classes is here. Of note, at the high school level, it's Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II or Algebra II + Pre-calc, and then either AP Calculus, AP Stats, or Pre-calc. Actually looks pretty similar to my high school's mathematics curriculum. Three cheers for any school district which eliminates trigonometry/keeps trig around only insofar as it's useful for calculus (which is my impression of the Algebra II + pre-calc option). Reasonably gifted kids are gonna end up where they were gonna end up anyway (i.e., calculus) so there's basically nothing lost in giving a hand up to kids who will benefit from having an extra year of math maturity.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 17:36 |
|
|
It's important to understand the changes to curriculum at all grades rather than just focusing on this one specific change. Under Common Core, the general principles of algebra are introduced far earlier (1st grade, actually) than they were in the past. As the lady in the article mentioned, rather than suddenly hitting students with pre-algebra in 7th grade (or at least that's when it was for me), they will be introduced to these concepts throughout elementary school (which used to be nothing but arithmetic). My mother has been a first grade teacher for over 40 years (just retired last year) and was involved in a bunch of stuff like choosing textbooks and what have you. She says that, under Common Core, even in first grade they do exercises that are basically algebra from a different perspective where students will be asked to, for example, "make 100 using 7, 3, and 10" and then asked to add/subtract/multiply/divide the latter 3 numbers to reach the first number (it's a good exercise because the more advanced students can be as creative as they want). Basically, if you look at the entire curriculum from 1st-12th grade, math isn't being dumbed down by Common Core. I'd be a little concerned if they started to remove AP Calculus from classrooms or something, but the change mentioned in this article is not a problem and parents only think it is because they don't understand the purpose behind the changes. edit: Actually, come to think of it, what exactly is the benefit gained by having all students take calculus one year earlier? I was one of those kids who take calculus 3 at a local college after school in 12th grade, and in retrospect I don't think I really benefited in any significant way by being slightly ahead when starting college. I think that many of us are just thinking "well I took calculus and it was good, ergo I want other kids to be able to take calculus" and just assuming that the benefits outweigh the costs. edit2: blah_blah posted:You go to a bad school if there aren't enough people taking Algebra I in 9th grade to make up a whole class. At the school I went to during 9th grade (before I moved back to Canada), the solid students were in Geometry in 9th grade, the really good ones were in Algebra II, and there were a handful of people in Pre-Calculus and Calculus AB as freshman. This was a solid school in an upper middle-class area, but not a magnet school or anything like that. I'm pretty sure this is only the case at top schools. I went to the top public school in Memphis, TN and while we had full classes of people taking Algebra II in 9th grade, most kids were taking Algebra I. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Sep 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 22:16
|
|
