Kids should spend more time on this sort of problem solving. So often they learn a method and can follow the algorithm perfectly, but don’t know how to relate it to actual problems or identify which method to use if it’s not specified. Maybe it’s partly a matter of confidence, too.
How about this one:
It’s paywalled unfortunately, but it looks like a large scale study comparing students at existing schools that are tracked or not, not experimental programs. The result:
“Our results reaffirm that tracking has persistent instructional benefits for all students.”
(But, “high-achieving students who are tracked in middle school may suffer considerable losses in self-concept that subsequently depress their achievement, and mathematics course-taking.”)
PS: Please can someone confirm for me what grades are middle school and which high school, and how old kids would be during them?
I’m not sure enough people read the WaPo article, which I think has some good context
In multiple rounds of video calls with reporters Monday, Lane said this assertion is false. He said the initiative does not propose eliminating accelerated math classes, nor does it require all students in a grade to take the same math class no matter their level of ability. Under the initiative, students would still take higher-level classes tailored to their grasp of mathematics, he said.
Lane also noted that those kinds of decisions — how an advanced student should best progress through middle and high school math classes — would be made by local school officials, not the Virginia Department of Education, as has always been the case. Every school division has vast discretion in how it uses state standards to formulate its curriculum, he said: “Ultimately the school divisions decide what courses look like.”
Lane is the State Superintendent of schools. It looks like in VA the State Department of Education doesn’t even have the power to do what the alarmist, right-wing press appears to be saying it does. It builds out guidelines and the local districts decide on implementation. It also appears fairly likely the initial conservative school board member in Loudoun VA was given an “analysis” of the proposal from some right wing source, which caused him to jump to conclusions–that board member has already backtracked and said after receiving more information he is much less concerned. It seems like rightwing agit-prop shops had already gotten ahold of it though and built up false and misleading narratives online to outrage the right (this is mostly all the right is built on today, is manufactured outrage, this process is all but automatic over any issue.)
While there may be an important debate about tracking and other issues to be had, the core thrust of the OP’s post is not accurate. Not representative of the legal situation with regulation of schools in the Commonwealth, and based on manufactured right wing propaganda.
That looks like an interesting study; have you read the full version? Are they using only two groupings (high- and low-ability), and how are they dividing them? Do the low achievers also suffer losses in self-concept in tracked classes, or only the high achievers?
Middle school is typically grades 6-8 (so roughly ages 11-13), and high school grades 9-12 (ages 14-18).
There are various setups, but the most typical is that Elementary school is K-5 (roughly ages 6-11), Middle Schools is grades 6-8 (ages 12-14), and High School is grades 9-12 (ages 15-18).
This is an important point. While state standard curriculum and models are important, in most states (certainly in mine) each district has very wide latitude to modify, extend, and update. They are only strictly held to being scored based on the standard rubric for each grade. Maybe Virginia’s DOE has more power to force districts to use heterogeneous math classes at the Middle School level, but I haven’t seen any evidence of that.
Whether tracking or heterogeneous classes is truly better for the widest swath of students seems to be a very open question. I’m excited to see some districts try it - hopefully we will have more real-world data to analyze.
I also very much relate to the issues with labeling students “gifted”. I have seen first hand the difficulty to self-image that can happen when a labeled student struggles, or even gets a problem wrong in class. When so much of your self worth is tied up in that label, it can lead to risk-avoidance and even fear and hatred of school.
All states have absolute control over their local subdivisions except where pre-empted by federal control. There is no concept of “county rights” in American government; local governments are entirely creatures of convenience set up at the pleasure of state governments. Saying that local school boards would be free to set policies within areas that Virginia does not choose to legislate on at the state level is a meaningless tautology. If the Virginia DoE mandates a particular math course then there is nothing a local school board can do about it; any claims to the contrary are simply unenforceable promises that such a mandate will not be passed.
It also appears fairly likely the initial conservative school board member in Loudoun VA
Ian Serotkin is an elected member of the Democratic Party in a liberal area of a centrist state, but I guess his wrongthink on education makes him “conservative” because the Washington Post says so.
was given an “analysis” of the proposal from some right wing source
He attended the video seminars conducted by the people pushing the proposal.
It seems like rightwing agit-prop shops had already gotten ahold of it though and built up false and misleading narratives online to outrage the right (this is mostly all the right is built on today, is manufactured outrage, this process is all but automatic over any issue.)
The infographic which actually says that there will be one math course for everyone through 10th grade is still there and we’re still hearing a lot of doubletalk from proven liars in the Virginia educational apparatus about why.
The Virginia Dept of Education is not a LEGISLATIVE body; it can do only what the Virginia legislature has empowered it to do. Has the Virginia legislature authorized the Dept of Education to mandate what local school boards do, yes or no? If yes, please cite the relevant statute; if no, please cite the pending bills or other changes you see coming that would give the department that authority.
You’re mixing up a U.S. constitutional fact with implemented laws in the given states. Under the U.S. constitution the powers of state subdivisions are determined by that State. However within that state, the established constitution and statutes of that state are law of the land. Administrators at the State Board of Education must act within those laws–they can be sued and compelled otherwise if they fail to do so, they do not have the power to alter the statutes of the Commonwealth of Virginia or the constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia. As a general note, many states have enshrined local “home rule” in their state constitutions, which ultimately the state’s constitutional process could allow for that to be changed, but it is not the case that in the here and now, day to day actions of government that State executive branch functionaries have the ability to override local authorities at whim. They may have such power if the laws of their states provide for it, or they may not.
Virginia does not have ordinary constitutional or statutory “home rule” as a broad concept.
However under the statutes of Virginia, § 22.1-28 the supervision of schools in each division is specifically the purview of the local school board.
The state Board of Education in Virginia does not control local school systems, it sets standards. Those standards being proposed explicitly have been clarified to not require all students grades 6-11 or whatever the claim was, to take the same identical math courses regardless of aptitude.
Also, school boards in Virginia are non-partisan. Ian Serotkin is not an elected Democrat. It looks like he is endorsed by the Democrat party though, so fair enough–although I actually called him a “conservative” board member, which is not a party affiliation.
As an example, Project Veritas regularly finds people that are working in places like that and manipulates people to say things that they think they are plausible but are wrong. It would not surprise me that the source you used exaggerated a lot of what was going on. As other sources look at the “scandal” it turns that the original sources did really get it wrong, but the right wing sources typically never correct it or notice how wrong the source they used was.
On edit: I will have to notice that it is a typical move for media exaggerators from the right to trip apparent left leaning or democratic leaning people into misunderstandings and exaggerations too.
He is an elected political official who is a member of the Democratic Party and ran on the endorsements of prominent Democrats. Just like every officially “non-partisan” position anywhere in the country, it’s not really “non-partisan” and the idea that there is any difference between “an elected member of the Democratic Party” and “an elected Democrat” is nonsense. There’s absolutely no reason to believe he is a “conservative” on any issue except for the fallacious reasoning that anyone who disagrees with the Washington Post’s education reporter must be a “conservative” and therefore wrong.
If you want to find “conservatives” in Loudoun County it’s not too hard; they have a Republican Party that is entirely pro-Trump, whose position on education is dominated by nonsense culture war issues like bathroom bills, etc. Serotkin won an election running against those people because he is not a conservative.
The fact that you respond to the portion of my post about partisanship but not the simple, statute based explanation that the VA BOE doesn’t have the power you claimed it does, was an interesting choice. To repeat–the Board of Education in Virginia does not have the power alleged.
Sans any other compelling evidence, that matter is now settled. Additionally it appears that a school board member in a local county raised some concerns over poor wording on a BOE website, which was clarified a couple days later by the Superintendant. Who correctly reminded people the state BOE would not even have the authority to tell boards that all students grade 7 take the same math class. Given that it appears this issue has largely been championed online by right wing agit-prop, without any compelling data being submitted from other sources I do not believe the thrust of the OP is factually correct–that in VA students are being forced to all attend the same math classes based on which grade they are in. It would seem to me unless you have some actual evidence to back up your claims, there’s “nothing” here.
Yeah, it is sad this is the way disinformation spreads these days. This particular case is basically a different version of the “Biden Administration banning hamburger” or “meat eating” fake news story that rolled around right wing propaganda outlets for a few days. Make a fake claim, get people riled up, and hope no one notices when the correction comes in a few days later.
He didn’t get his info from some right ring source but straight from the horse’s mouth.
And then apparently the VDoE published an update a couple of days ago in response to the criticism that has some big changes to the original messaging and information:
I wonder if the OP could ask the mods to change the thread title to “Local official misunderstands bureaucratic proposal until it’s clarified,” to better reflect what happened.
After 30 years of watching the right-wing spin-machine in action, I’m deeply skeptical that that’s the case. But show me the text of the original proposal and how it differs from the text of the modified proposal, and I can be persuaded.
It doesn’t sound like it was even a proposal–more like a rough draft of potential changes getting its first public airing. In that sort of context, adjusting things in response to feedback is the whole point, it’s not a gotcha.
As others pointed out, that is not the case since it was not the final proposal but a draft, as pointed before, the usual is that there will be no corrections coming from the right wing sources of information that jumped the gun. Sometimes they will correct, but only after the damage that they want is done.