Are many middle/high school students being pushed too far ahead in math?

<p>A bit off topic, but I went to school with a friend whose father was a math prof at The University of Michigan 30 years ago. He complained one day of an instance where an engineering student asked an interesting question on theory. He was thrilled with the question and was excited to respond when other engineering students in the class complained that this was not pertinent to the class and considered it a waste of their time. He was very disappointed with most of the engineering students he taught. Unfortunately, some people only want to know what they need to know.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>According to that syllabus, IB Math SL includes an introduction to calculus, but it is not a full calculus course. University of Texas’ AP credit chart allows a 4 or higher on IB Math SL to count only as equivalent to its precalculus course, M305G.</p>

<p>In any case, the Texas ALEKS test covers high school level math; it does not specify that it covers calculus or other college level math.</p>

<p>At our school district (Texas) advanced 8th graders are allowed to take Algebra I and Geometry at the same time and then they will take Alg II in 9th grade. Students have to go HS for the Geometry in the zero-hour period (before first period). There is also a credit for exam option for Geometry without taking the course at district. So if students pass the exam before first semester of HS freshman year they can also be advanced to Alg II in 9th grade. For all these students they are eligible to take AP Calc (AB or BC) in 11th grade.</p>

<p>sunnydayfun - How long have you had this? I know one school in Houston that introduced it this year (does not help someone in 12th though).</p>

<p>UCB - It is irrelevant how UT wants to equate a course once a student gets there. High schoolers are not allowed to take Math SL exam without working on Calculus first. It reflects badly on the high school if the syllabus is not covered and they don’t do well.</p>

<p>Thank you for your post perfomersmom (#178). Not only do I agree completely with you and not only was my daughter’s experience the same as your daughters’, but the differences became even more pronounced at the college level where reading and writing expectations leaped dramatically. My daughter reported reading 100-150 pages of dense text in preparation for particular classes.</p>

<p>As to the original focus of this thread, I think it’s right that those who can accelerate should be able to do so at the speed that works for that kid. The approaches taken are so different in different schools that the sequence barely seems sequential or universal. In one school, I’ve seen kids allowed to test into whatever math class they land in and beyond that are given different levels for each class. At another, everyone is forced into taking the same sequence regardless of proven mastery of a higher class. And at one highly rated public school, “Geometry” bears little relationship to the “Geometry” class given in the neighboring, similarly rated district. When these kids get to college, most of them retake calculus and find that their high school class did not actually take them through the subject.</p>

<p>texaspg - the problem I have is that what you are suggesting is that a student is not ready for Calculus if they have not already HAD Calculus, which is obviously a recursion problem, not to mention false. Also, the student may not be admitted to the engineering program out of the gate, but that does not mean that there is no way to get there once they have not taken AP Calc in HS.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Even so, the ALEKS placement test only covers “high school level” math. Only at elite high schools would calculus be included in normal “high school level” math – the normal high school level math sequence goes up to precalculus, but does not include calculus.</p>

<p>Just because completing a calculus course is sufficient to satisfy the “Calculus Readiness Requirement” does not mean that it is necessary. That the normal suggested program of study starts in first semester freshman calculus means that they expect the student to be ready to learn calculus, not already knowledgeable in it.</p>

<p>To follow up on the diversion from the main topic: Just to assure everyone–I was not actually advocating the one-size-fits-all approach to literature and history. I made the implicit assumption that there were honors-type literature courses leading up to AP Lit. The idea of a completely undifferentiated curriculum in literature would only work in a school that was itself extremely homogeneous.</p>

<p>My post was intended to address the differences between the relatively radical acceleration that is possible in math, vs. the comparatively gentle acceleration in lit.</p>

<p>I should note: The local school did allow one of the verbally gifted students to take college courses post AP Lit.</p>

<p>Sylvan - I completely lost you on this recursive loop issue. </p>

<p>Let me put it bluntly. A State school that allows auto admits inside the state should not have a requirement giving an advantage to only selective schools that may get their students upto the AP calculus test by end of 11th grade when they clearly know someone needs to have completed geometry by the end of 8th grade to reach there.</p>

<p>UCB - Does Berkeley have a requirement that states someone should have completed AP Calculus AB or BC test to be admitted to engineering unconditionally?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>^^ I think that is important. And once a parent takes the step to create this sort of precedent it is in place for other, younger students who can also benefit from the experience. So I really think it is worth the energy to make it happen.</p>

<p>At my kids’ former HS, it is now possible for sophomores and juniors to take literature and history and languages at the local university.</p>

<p>

If the suggestion is that a student is not ready for calculus unless they have already TAKEN calculus, then how would they be ready for AP Calculus?

Reiterating this.</p>

<p>Don’t tell me. Tell that to UT Engineering school that made up the stupid requirement.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>No. According to [Prospective</a> Freshman FAQ — UC Berkeley College of Engineering](<a href=“http://coe.berkeley.edu/students/prospective-students/admissions/freshman-faq.html]Prospective”>Prospective freshman FAQs - Berkeley Engineering) :</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>“Three years” in high school normally means completion of algebra 1, geometry, and algebra 2; “four years” in high school normally means completion of those courses and trigonometry / precalculus. Of course, given the high level of selectivity, many applicants will have completed a year of calculus by the time they graduate from high school, even though that is beyond the requirement and recommendation.</p>

<p>Also, the sample programs of study listed by Berkeley College of Engineering show first semester freshman calculus as the “normal” first semester freshman math course (Math 1A), although many students do start in a more advanced course due to AP credit.</p>

<p>[College</a> of Engineering Announcement — UC Berkeley College of Engineering](<a href=“http://coe.berkeley.edu/students/college-of-engineering-announcement]College”>Undergraduate Guide - Berkeley Engineering)</p>

<p>Note that placement into Math 1A does not require any previous calculus knowledge (try the on-line placement test the Berkeley math department recommends entering freshman students to try before deciding on a math course – no need to register or pay anything):</p>

<p>[Choosing</a> the First Math Course at UC Berkeley - UC Berkeley Department of Mathematics](<a href=“http://math.berkeley.edu/courses_1stcourse.html]Choosing”>http://math.berkeley.edu/courses_1stcourse.html)</p>

<p>It would be surprising if Texas’ ALEKS placement test required any knowledge of calculus (as opposed to algebra, geometry, and trigonometry) to get the score needed to be calculus ready.</p>

<p>@texas-

As far as I know it has been for a few years now. My college freshman son had 2 classmates taking precalc while he was taking Algebra II when they were in 10th grade.</p>

<p>Put me down as being less than enthusiastic about the uber-acceleration going on at some high power publics/magnets and college preps. I think math and science are really important but I think rather than push these kids ever further ahead that it would be better to send them outside to read a good book under a tree. Just sitting and noodling is how a lot of geniuses do their genius stuff, not being on an endless treadmill of academic exploits. I have a feeling that, ironically, we’re going to loose a lot of ideas from a lot of our best minds with this trend.</p>

<p>There’s plenty of time “to sit around and noodle” at public magnets. It is probably similar in pace to a place like Williams or Swarthmore…</p>

<p>

One of my college profs, sadly now deceased, said that his American grad students were less prepared for the courses, but more creative when it came to research, than their Asian and Indian counterparts. The A and I students were exceedingly well prepared but tended to be more rigid and less creative in their thinking. Would be interesting to see what others who are working with STEM graduate students think about this.</p>

<p>Sylvan - I think it has to do with having resources to play around with in the other countries. I had one course in Fortran back in 85 where the end result was to write code for someone in a computer lab to punch holes in cards and feed it to a single main frame that was available for the entire university and it would print out a result akin to hello world, the entire process taking two days.</p>

<p>When I started masters in US, I had access to so many computers where I was typing in code directly and executing the programs that I kept wondering about the punch card process that I left behind. Essentially, we had a lot of access to theory but very low on the resource end to try much of it.</p>

<p>sylvan8798</p>

<p>What do you mean by “American grad students”?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Well said, sewhappy. I agree with you.</p>