Home › Forums › Questions about the standards › Arranging the high school standards into courses › Algebra 2 for all?
- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 9 months ago by Bill McCallum.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 13, 2014 at 9:12 am #3125Sarah StevensParticipant
As we continue to carry our first cohort of students through a high school Common Core sequence, we are looking at what kind of courses will be acceptable for high school math graduation credit. The non-plus standards include many topics that have, previously, been included only in an Algebra 2 (and sometimes Pre-Calculus/Trigonometry course). In other words, the standards written for all students are topics from Algebra 2 or above.
This shift in math topics on the upper end of school has the potential to have a huge impact on the expectations high schools have for students before they graduate. Historically; high schools have offered alternatives to Algebra 2 which will meet graduation requirements but the scope and sequence is not as broad as Algebra 2. Students in these courses are, typically, not planning to attend a 4 year university immediately after high school. They might be planning on going straight to the work force or to attend a community/technical college.
My question is, why are some of these topics not (+) standards for STEM students? For example, do all students need arithmetic operations on polynomials, rewriting rational expressions, analyzing logarithmic and trigonometric functions, composing and finding the inverse of functions, radian measurement and the unit circle, equations for conic sections, etc. I’m sure there is a reason for including these topics in the “for all” category but I’m curious about how the writing team decided if a standard was (+) or not.
As a follow-up, do you think these topics necessitate Algebra 2 for all students? I have read about states, such as Texas, which required Algebra 2 for graduation and discovered that a more targeted approach to math credit- based on students needs- better served its students. I think we can create rigorous math courses for a students third year of math which include an in-depth study of some of these topics but I am struggling with how I can guarantee that all students meet the basic expectations of the standards without requiring Algebra 2 for all.
Thanks!
January 6, 2015 at 8:23 am #3313Sarah StevensParticipantHi again! I recently came across this blog post by Steven Leinwand addressing many of the frustrations I have about the high school standards. http://steveleinwand.com/we-really-need-to-revise-the-9-12-common-core-math-standards/#comment-10434
I definitely feel like the high school standards are too broad. It is frustrating when my K8 co-workers talk about how focused the standards are and I have to clarify that the High School standards do not share the same focus. For us, there is more. Are there plans to revise the High School Standards. Many states have 7 year adoption cycles for standards so they are beginning the process of re-adopting standards. I fear if the states undertake revisions in isolation, we will lose the combined force we gained when math classes were the same across the country.
January 10, 2015 at 10:10 pm #3328lhwalkerParticipantI was really interested in the link you shared but it doesn’t open to the article. Can you re-post? I’m working on Algebra I curriculum for our district and have really had to look closely at what our students are doing in 8th grade to capitalize on (review) immediately and move on promptly, scaffolding weak spots along the way. I nearly croaked at the idea of teaching 14-year-olds about rational exponents when they struggle so badly with integer exponents, but then I realized there was a shift in emphasis to usefulness with exponential functions instead of 3xy(2xyz)^3…. I am confident, now, they can do it. There are other topics like piece-wise functions that can be integrated along with a review of linear functions, etc. So far I have 20 extra days each semester to work in more project-based activities.
January 15, 2015 at 9:46 am #3335Sarah StevensParticipantLet met try again. It doesn’t link to the article but to his blog. When you click on the link in the blog, it will download a word document with his thougths. http://steveleinwand.com/we-reallly-need-to-revise-the-9-12-common-core-math-standards/
If this link doesn’t work, you can go to steveleinwand.com and navigate to the blogs. It is the second blog back from the most recent.
January 20, 2015 at 8:25 pm #3339Bill McCallumKeymasterNot sure what to say here. I agree with some of what Steve says, disagree with some other other things he says, and think he misses some important structural elements of the standards. Everybody could write standards that they personally think are better than the Common Core. (Including me.) But that’s not the point of having common standards. Different people with different opinions settled on an agreement in 2010 about expectations for what students should know at the end of each grade level or course. Until we prove we can implement an agreement (not at all clear yet) I’m not interested in relitigating old arguments.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.