Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Learning Environments How is compressed CC junior high math working?

For those here who's kids have been taking a compressed version of common core math how is it working for your gifted kids? I'm mostly interested at the junior high & high school level, but if anyone's school system has added compressed math for elementary school that would also be relevant. Please include details like what grades they are compacting, if they felt they were missing information, or is going too slow.

For those who don't know what compression means. Common core isn't a spiral curriculum, so skipping isn't recommended for acceleration. Instead it's recommended for the fastest kids to take compacted classes. Pushing 7/8/9th grade in two junior years. Or 9/10/11th (Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II) in two years. These are the two more common configurations. As I've posted earlier 8th grade math is a new class, that includes part of what was per-algebra, what used to be the first 3-4 chapters of algebra & a few chapters from geometry. The official documents from my states does not recommend compaction before 7th grade.

I'm asking this because I am on a committee that is trying to figure how to change math tracking for my school district in response to thew new common core math curriculum for 7-12th grade. Many of the junior high teachers feel very strongly that they want to eliminate tracking in junior high, although I don't think that will happen. Too many very bright and advanced mathematicians in my school district. One of the things we are trying to figure out is a way to add more entry points into the advanced tracks, for a kid who wasn't ready for advanced math at 12 but might be at 15.

I know several posters were discussing this as an issue last spring/summer.

Our district has pathways for kids to take Algebra any year between 6th and 9th grade. However, there is no attention to formal compaction. So what tends to happen for late entry into the upper pathways is that kids will take a summer course at the university to cover a missing years worth of material before sixth grade.

We've actually had the opposite problem of the above post though. Algebra II in 8th grade has not always been at the same standard as when its taught in high school due to the quality of the teachers.

No one ever confused me with an egalitarian, but a public school requiring parents to provide transport for a core academic subject such as math is unfair and perhaps illegal. My wife and I work full time, but we'd find some way to transport our children if we thought the program were worthwhile. Do you tell the qualified students whose parents cannot or will not transport them, "tough luck"?

It's hard to know for sure, as our school is quite opaque and close-mouthed when it comes to questioning the math curriculum; also, they don't really follow any one textbook but use a lot of district-designed materials, so it's hard for me to know where units would traditionally fit, etc. For example, DS's 7th grade math has already covered several algebra units, they also do a bit of geometry, graphing, etc. DDs geometry class just spent a while on some trigonometry, etc- as you noted, the common core units are aligned differently.

I *think* our school is offering compacted 8th and 9th (algebra), though they don't call it that. All kids are together through 7th, then there is a split, where more than half the kids take common core algebra in 8th, the remainder take common core math 8 and then algebra in 9th. My DD took common core algebra last year, and I assume it was a compaction of math 8 and algebra, though as noted I am not certain. Overall, I think it was ok. It was unbearably slow moving for her, though, despite over-the-top warnings from all the counselors and math teachers about how fast-paced it would be. Just lots of repetition and review for her, but DD is an outlier in this class. I think it was a stretch for some kids, (hence the repetition and review) but the exam scores were generally considered good. There were a couple of minor topics that the class did not cover before the common core exam (but because there was nearly a month between their common core exam and their regents exam, they covered the material then; I don't recall what topics they were, and as I said they were considered minor).

This is the only real "tracking" point our math program has- kids can then take honors or regents level (or remedial) classes, based on teacher recommendations (which are easily and frequently over-ridden by a parent request, so essentially all kids can take honors math if they choose). As an aside, this is quite evident in honors geometry, where about half my DDs class is sophomores (meaning they didn't take algebra in 8th grade, the path the stronger math students would take). Ugh. According to DD, they struggle. Lots of use of the tutoring provided in the school's learning center and reportedly of outside tutors as well. Thankfully, the aforementioned repetition and review are much less in this class, and the pace is better (though still slow for DD).

On that vein I have been pushing that the district has to offer an acceleration program other than summer school. I'm OK with summer school being an optional way to accelerate, but I don't believe it should be the ONLY option available.

This is what my district is doing as well. The explanation I've been given is that there aren't any GOOD common core materials out there, and our district works on a 7 year cycle replacing text books and it's not time yet. So they are implementing common core by using a variety of materials they already own.

To meet acceleration needs, tracking with fluid track changes, remediation, common core, and existing materials, then I think they need to consider a radical departure.

Teach to One:
http://www.newclassrooms.org/reimagine.html

This program is really impressive, the results are particularly powerful for kids striving to succeed. Without a change from the traditional linear classroom, it would be hard to move out of ruts.

Also, they could be looking at digital textbooks (aka techbooks) as the good ones will be dynamically maintained, allow for self-assessment, compacting, additional practice, and still meet the common core thinking needs.

If none of that, then they could implement a math learner model they are working towards that splits curriculum into internally consistent dependency tracks so that a kid can move along more than one track concurrently.

In terms of the direct experience with compacting question, DS8 doesn't have experience with middle school math and likely never will as he's moving onto high school algebra.

Well I did hear there was an enlightened high school somewhere that let kids compact years 9 and 10 (grades8 and 9) but it may have been an urban myth.

If you had a gifted kid in junior high shouldn't your kid already be beyond common core? All the gifted in junior high (7th and 8th)in our district will have at the minimum completed Algebra 1 and Geometry by the end of 8th grade.

My oldest is not yet in the higher grades, I only know what the parents of the elder gifted students tell me about how 7th-12th grade. Much consternation, here, though, in light of the changes.

Our schools used to have 4-6th grade math compacted into 2 years, prior to the Common Core. Now this type of "acceleration" is thought to be a big no-no until 7th grade under our schools' interpretation of the Common Core.

In reality, I've come to believe that SOME of the 4th-6th graders (a subset of the previously accelerated group) DO need a compacted curriculum, while others would probably be fine with the slower approach the schools are now taking. The problem for my DD is that they have decided to slow down ALL of the students in the previously accelerated group. DD is left feeling as though the entire year so far has been review.

Meanwhile, I am aware that DD's experience is NOT the experience of all of the students in her math group - some have been so challenged by the new curriculum, that they have asked to be allowed to go back to "regular" math.

From what I hear of the older grades (7-12), many of the students were already accelerated. SOME of these students have gaps in knowledge/understanding. The school feels these students need to be slowed down, while other are starting high school in the higher level courses.

The way they have explained it to us, the future REGULAR course math students will be in many ways AHEAD of the previous years' students, because of the challenge of the new curriculum. From our perspective, it is a bit difficult to understand why this is so.

Actually, the Common Core could ultimately hasten our need for a request for acceleration. I think that DD would have perhaps been fine in the accelerated class (that no longer exists), but the "new version" is exacerbating the fact that she needs something different.