An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California
scottaaronson.blog
An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California
1–10 of 657 posts
Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California
#2[deleted]
Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California
#3Efforts like this are well meaning, but only treat symptoms. The major impetus for watered down curricula is the very rational fear that large swaths of the student population will fail if expected to perform at the prior standards of rigor. Schools are not prepared to hold back massive numbers of kids, drop out proclivity for students held back rises, and teachers will be poorly evaluated by virtue of their students' inability above and beyond reasonable expectations of what they can learn in a single year given prior failure to build a proper foundation.
How we got to this point is perhaps a lot more complicated and politically fraught, but it has to be dealt with. Administrators and state education leadership are often simply responding to the incentives and avoiding dire outcomes suggested by the data. They have to craft palatable excuses for it, and it's ultimately a waste of time to engage those excuses on face.
Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California
#4Efforts like this are well meaning, but only treat symptoms. The major impetus for watered down curricula is the very rational fear that large swaths of the student population will fail if expected to perform at the prior standards of rigor. Schools are not prepared to hold back massive numbers of kids, drop out proclivity for students held back rises, and teachers will be poorly evaluated by virtue of their students…
This is a natural consequence of the American myth/narrative that everyone is suited for academic high school and university. Other countries simply sort people into different schools much earlier, and spend the high school years teaching meaningful vocational skills to those not on the academic track, rather than wasting everyone's time.
Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California
#5Efforts like this are well meaning, but only treat symptoms. The major impetus for watered down curricula is the very rational fear that large swaths of the student population will fail if expected to perform at the prior standards of rigor. Schools are not prepared to hold back massive numbers of kids, drop out proclivity for students held back rises, and teachers will be poorly evaluated by virtue of their students…
They're avoiding dire outcomes for themselves while damaging society, however. A merely performative education is truly something awful.
Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California
#6[deleted]
Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California
#7Efforts like this are well meaning, but only treat symptoms. The major impetus for watered down curricula is the very rational fear that large swaths of the student population will fail if expected to perform at the prior standards of rigor. Schools are not prepared to hold back massive numbers of kids, drop out proclivity for students held back rises, and teachers will be poorly evaluated by virtue of their students…
This makes no sense even as a well meaning. "Some kids are going to fail so we need to prevent other kids from excelling." Obvious BS from California
Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California
#8Efforts like this are well meaning, but only treat symptoms. The major impetus for watered down curricula is the very rational fear that large swaths of the student population will fail if expected to perform at the prior standards of rigor. Schools are not prepared to hold back massive numbers of kids, drop out proclivity for students held back rises, and teachers will be poorly evaluated by virtue of their students…
Rather than standing tall for universal high standards, education officials pass the buck to look good. The result will be an increasingly unproductive, stratified, and unequal society.
You can pass and pass and pass people, but eventually an employer is going to need someone to do the job, and they will make sure they get that someone. So there will be a hard standard sooner or later. The only choice is whether we give all students a chance to meet that standard.
Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California
#9Efforts like this are well meaning, but only treat symptoms. The major impetus for watered down curricula is the very rational fear that large swaths of the student population will fail if expected to perform at the prior standards of rigor. Schools are not prepared to hold back massive numbers of kids, drop out proclivity for students held back rises, and teachers will be poorly evaluated by virtue of their students…
This is a natural consequence of the American myth/narrative that everyone is suited for academic high school and university. Other countries simply sort people into different schools much earlier, and spend the high school years teaching meaningful vocational skills to those not on the academic track, rather than wasting everyone's time.
The Netherlands been an example.
Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California
#10Sorry for being out of the loop and asking a (possibly) dumb question: What is the stated reason that the CMF suggested these changes?
Is it about budgets? Is it because some people might think these classes "aren't that important?". The open letter seems to suggest that it's about closing gaps between privileged and less privileged - is that it? Honest question - I'm not trying to stir the pot.