(High) school math is so out of touch… “There is a difference: How much math is there in the CURRICULUM and college? Or how much math is there in your REAL WORK as an engineer?” cc: @conradwolfram @nctm youtu.be/MhanyR5Rfk0

Color in the odds! 🤯

Jelani, I’m still unclear after skimming the report. Maybe you can clarify? The report says IM1-2-3 is the required sequence. But, that doesn’t acknowledge the ‘Expanded Math Sequence’ that the UC introduced several years ago.

It seems much more accurate to me that the conclusions should have been: “1) encouraging thinking/reasoning, 2) informing students about learning goals, and 3) frequently checking for understanding are correlated with better performance on PISA.”

On my mind a lot recently: “…the tension that threatens progress is not one of equity vs excellence or traditional vs reform, but of dominant vs critical mathematics education.” @RG1gal

My district’s data. And we did the same at my previous district. Very doable.

Here, I solved your medical problem example on my phone in 30 sec. I’d hope a real doc would use similar/better tools. Quadratic functions are worth studying, extensive time factoring by hand is not. I’m going to respectfully withdraw from further replies at this point.

We offer a course sequence at HS that gets any student to Calc by 12th grade IM1-IM2-IM3-Cal or IM1-IM2-PC-calc). Our data shows that these students both pass the class and the AP test at nearly the same rate as those who were accelerated.

There’s a constant tension between individuals using schooling for social advantage vs schooling for true education. But offering Alg1/IM1 in 8th grade will not be an easy solution to racial equity. Here is data from my district. What’s yours? @minilek @joboaler @steve_leinwand

I’m genuinely not trying to be contrarian here, as I think we all have more areas of overlap in our thinking than differences. The paragraph you shared the other day paints a nice portrait of our aims (at least at HS level, which is my area of expertise).