Reforms to Ease Students’ Stress Divide a New Jersey School District

[ucbalumnus]

@Ynotgo

If you look at the AP data, a bunch of junior high kids take AP Spanish.

Probably heritage speakers or students from Spanish/English immersion elementary schools.

[frazzled2thecore]

Not everyone knows what they will want to major in when they get to college when they are deciding on a math sequence that will get them to calculus, or whether they will want to take a class that requires calculus as a pre-requisite or co-requisite regardless of major.

Disclaimer - I myself was already in college, taking proof-based calculus that required only pre-calc as a pre-req, at the same age as many high school juniors. I ended up in a major that did not require calculus and took no further classes that required calculus as a pre-requisite, yet found the course rewarding.

[Waiting2exhale]

@yearstogo : “Son was able to multiply fractions in elementary school (third I think?) and the teacher was having the kids use crayons to color x pieces of a pizza to represent/understand fractions.”

Oh, man, I feel for ya. I do.

[OHMomof2]

While that assumption may be mostly true, it is not the same as the assumption in reply #939 that all students on the non-advanced math track (completing precalculus in 12th grade) are the type of students who will choose a major and college that do not require calculus.

As a matter of fact a lot of students don’t even take precalculus in 12th grade.

I didn’t say “all students” in 939 either.

I’m genuinely curious though, so looking around it seems that according to http://launchings.blogspot.com/2013/08/maa-calculus-study-effects-of-calculus.html

Of the 300,000 who enrolled in Calculus I in fall 2010, just over half had studied calculus in high school.

So around 300K take it in college and there are 12+ million college students at a time so let’s say about 4m frosh (though certainly more as many leave before graduating) .

That’s not many at all.

In looking for those numbers I found a lot of interesting stuff that suggests probably too many kids are taking Calc in HS, or not learning it well if they do take it. Some of it is in the article above, some is here -

In 2004 over 225,000 high school students took the AP calculus exam. This number is far larger than the number of students who took mainstream first-semester calculus in all four-year undergraduate programs in the Fall of 2000. By the time of the next CBMS survey in 2005?06, we can expect that more students will take an AP Calculus exam than will take mainstream Calculus I in the Fall of 2005 in all 2-year and 4-year institutions combined.

http://www.maa.org/the-changing-face-of-calculus-first-semester-calculus-as-a-high-school-course

or

Enrollments at 2- and 4-year colleges have remained flat, while the number of AP Calculus tests has continued to grow at about 6% per year.[4]

Of course, these are only partial numbers. First-semester calculus is taught in other terms. But at most colleges, well over half of the enrollments in the first calculus class are in the fall term. It is safe to say that total college enrollment in mainstream first-term calculus is under 500,000, probably closer to 400,000. On the other hand, not all or even most students who study calculus in high school take the AP exam. According to the latest NAEP study, 16% of 12th-graders in 2004–05 were taking or had taken a course called Calculus.[5] This implies that about 500,000 high school students studied calculus in 2004–05.[6]

The problem is that relatively few of these students earn recognition for college-level work in calculus. Most colleges give credit beginning at either a 3 or a 4 on the AP Calculus exams. In 2006, 173,000 of the test takers earned 3 or higher, 129,000 earned 4 or higher.[7] Students do earn college credit for calculus in other ways including the International Baccalaureate program, enrollment in local colleges, and dual-enrollment programs (about which I will say much more in a future column), but these numbers are relatively small, a few tens of thousands. The total number of students who entered college in 2006 and actually received college credit for calculus taken while in high school was almost certainly below 200,000, roughly a third of those who had studied calculus.

What is worse, **many of the students who arrive in college with a calculus course on their high school transcript are not even considered ready for calculus. College-administered placement exams often direct them to pre-calculus or college algebra. **I am unaware of any estimate of the number of such students, but anecdotally it appears to be high.

This constitutes a crisis. Students who choose to study calculus in high school are a reasonable approximation of the top quintile of high school graduates. They are some of our best candidates for demanding careers in science, technology, engineering, and the mathematical sciences. I do not believe that, on the whole, we who teach in the colleges serve any of them very well. Those who have received college credit for the calculus they studied often find themselves in courses that articulate poorly with their high school experience. Those who start college by repeating first-term calculus find themselves re-treading familiar territory, but at a much faster pace, in larger classes, and with an instructor who is unable to give them the individual attention that they experienced when they struggled with these ideas the previous year. Those who are directed back to pre-calculus or college algebra find themselves in a frustrating and humiliating position with regard to mathematics.

http://www.macalester.edu/~bressoud/pub/launchings/launchings_04_07.html (Still Bressoud, just different article)

[ucbalumnus]

@OHMomof2

So around 300K take it in college and there are 12+ million college students at a time so let’s say about 4m frosh (though certainly more as many leave before graduating) .

There are 3.3 million high school graduates per year ( http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372 ), so it would be hard to have 4 million new frosh, since that would need every high school graduate that year to enroll in college, plus 0.7 million non-traditional students starting that year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/26/business/fewer-us-high-school-graduates-opt-for-college.html says that about 2/3 of new high school graduates enroll in college every year, so that makes about 2.2 million traditional frosh, though not all intend to go on to the bachelor’s degree path (remember, lots of community college students are looking for associates degrees, vocational course work, etc.). There will be some additional new frosh as non-traditional students “borrowed” from previous years’ high school graduates who did not immediately go to college.

[ucbalumnus]

Re: “This constitutes a crisis.”

Seems like the same crisis that has been continually afflicting US education, which is that the qualify of courses and curricula in US high schools is extremely variable, to the point that some high schools’ courses are not worthy of their course titles. A student who has completed high school math through calculus, but is found in college placement testing to be deficient in algebra, geometry, and/or trigonometry (not to mention calculus – presumably got a 1 or 2 on the AP test to be required to take the college math placement test) exposes the deficiency in his/her high school’s math department. Even highly selective colleges offer remedial math course work (e.g. Princeton Math 100) or slow-paced calculus with remedial math hidden in it (e.g. Harvard Math Ma-Mb, a two semester sequence that covers up to Math 1a which is calculus 1) because they have students whose high school math preparation was inadequate.

[Cardinal_Fang]

Seems like the same crisis that has been continually afflicting US education, which is that the qualify of courses and curricula in US high schools is extremely variable, to the point that some high schools’ courses are not worthy of their course titles. **A student who has completed high school math through calculus, but is found in college placement testing to be deficient in algebra, geometry, and/or trigonometry/b exposes the deficiency in his/her high school’s math department.

Exactly so. And the Larson textbook mentioned upthread, as being used in high school, is for these students, the students who are deficient in algebra, geometry and/or trig.

So we have a high school (GMT’s) that has some juniors who, the school realizes, are not well prepared in algebra, geometry and/or trig. And their solution is to try teaching these students calculus, using the textbook for unprepared students? The students are still in high school! If they are still imperfect in the high school subjects of algebra, geometry and trigonometry, then the high school should teach them algebra, geometry and trigonometry instead of pretending they are ready for calculus when they are not.

[OHMomof2]

that makes about 2.2 million traditional frosh, though not all intend to go on to the bachelor’s degree path (remember, lots of community college students are looking for associates degrees, vocational course work, etc.). There will be some additional new frosh as non-traditional students “borrowed” from previous years’ high school graduates who did not immediately go to college.

Weird.

In fall 2015, some 20.2 million students are expected to attend American colleges and universities, constituting an increase of about 4.9 million since fall 2000

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372

That’s quite a difference. Can’t be all international students can it?

But even if there are only 3 million frosh and 300K take Calc…that’s still a whole lot of students NOT taking Calc. A clear majority anyhow.

[Cardinal_Fang]

2.2 million traditional frosh,

20.2 million students are expected to attend American colleges and universities,

The majority of college students do not start as traditional freshmen, and do not go to four year colleges. The majority of American college students go to community college, and they are a good deal older on average than a kid just graduating from college.

[gphi777]

Ohio the 20 million includes graduate students, professional students, adults taking classes, kids who take 7 years to graduate, kids taking gap years etc

[mathyone]

Why would 8th graders not take the AP exam due to age? It is quite possible they would need the score for enrollment in future classes.

[OHMomof2]

Ah yes, older folks. The number taking calc does include 2 year college students.

[gunnerz]

Plainsboro teen found safe Sunday

WEST WINDSOR - The 17-year-old who went missing from West Windsor-Plainsboro High School on Friday was found safe on Sunday, Plainsboro police said…

Qian originally was reported missing after she left West Windsor-Plainsboro High School at 3 p.m. Plainsboro police said she may have been upset about a grade she received.

http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2016/01/found_missing_teen_from_west_windsor_found_safe_su.html#incart_river_home

[PragmaticMom]

The link below takes viewers to a thought-provoking piece about meritocracy and “white privilege.” It touches on many of the issues raised in this thread. It adds insight I’ve yet to see see articulated as eloquently as this writer, herself a graduate of WWP and Harvard and now a professional journalist. She writes:

“For it seems that the very people complaining that there is no one way to be smart, that academic structures ought to do a better job of recognizing different forms of intelligence, seem to think students need to fit a one-size-fits-all mold to be socially and emotionally healthy. Thankfully, our economy is increasingly recognizing that personality is a poor barometer for character. Many “socially awkward” people whose work ethic, quantitative ability, and intelligence are indisputable have been able to thrive as business leaders and entrepreneurs, humorists and artists. Unfortunately, the figures who have risen to social prominence while embracing all these aspects of their personalities are still almost all white men.”

“I’m glad to hear from my white classmates that their low GPAs and lack of extracurricular involvement haven’t precluded their professional success. That must be a wonderful reality to live in. Perhaps they can give me a tour some time. Unfortunately, that is not a reality in which their Asian-American peers have the luxury of residing. Correcting that injustice is a prerequisite to lecturing immigrant parents on how to raise their kids.”

More at this link: http://www.salon.com/2016/01/19/mediocrity_is_for_white_kids_debates_over_asians_and_the_academic_ethnic_divide_are_about_white_entitlement_not_oppressive_immigrant_parents/

[3girls3cats]

@PragmaticMom, the academic pedigree is not the thing that makes the difference for Asian-Americans.

[PragmaticMom]

@3girls3cats, I didn’t get that angle from the article. The writer’s position is that the definition of achievement is a moving target, controlled largely by white Americans. Yes, there are many ways to define intelligence. But historically, the definition has been dictated from a white perspective. If an Asian American is “a quiet nerd” with work ethic, the assumption is that he is one dimensional without creativity, personality, emotional intelligence, natural-born talent.
Yet, if a white student is an awkward nerd with work ethic, he does not suffer from the same bias. Many such white Americans, in fact, have gone on to prove that awkward/nerdy and creative/innovative are not mutually exclusive, something that society as a whole does not credit to Asians with the same attributes. Without the power to change cultural biases, Asians understandably embrace (or hope for) the meritocracy of academia. Ultimately, I found her argument persuasive, i.e. academic success is the most reliable rung for Asian Americans on the ladder of achievement. Bottom line, to take down the academic rat race, we have to first take down deeply-held cultural biases, including those expressed in college admissions decisions.

Can you expand on what you mean by academic pedigree in context of the article/writer’s views?

[gphi777]

The largest cultural biases are against Hispanics and blacks . Those biases are at the top of the list to be taken down.

[gettingschooled]

“Academic success is the most reliable ladder to success” I totally agree with this but honestly it is true for everyone which is why you should try to succeed academically but “most reliable” translates to “low risk” The definition of achievement hasn’t changed fundamentally- our culture rewards people willing to take risks, which means people who are willing to fail occasionally. The kid who didn’t win student council president and the kid who got a B in Precalc who figured out it wasn’t the end of the world.

[TheGFG]

PragmaticMom, you must have been too practical to play with dolls. Don’t you remember that Barbie always chose Ken, not Poindexter! News flash: awkward, nerdy white kids continue to be teased and ostracized. In fact, I’d contend they have it worse than nerdy Asians, since Asians are “supposed to be” smart and their cultures almost universally worship academic success. Not so with Caucasians, blacks and Hispanics. (I’ll grant you that with the Silicon Valley tech explosion, nerdiness a la Bill Gates has gotten some well-deserved respect. But not enough to change the general social dynamic.)

Secondly, the author’s thesis is that in 2016 white American gate-keepers are still re-inventing the definition of successful for the purpose of excluding others who are not like themselves. This certainly did happen in the past. However, I’d argue that it was the pro-diversity/racial sensitivity movement that produced the current college admissions situation. In order to be inclusive, elite colleges started limiting the acceptances of the advantaged majority WHO APPLY in order to protect the rights of minorities of all stripes to have a fair chance. That majority used to be rich, non Jewish Caucasians. Now it’s Asians. But rest assured that if too many well-qualified, moon-rock playing Martians started applying ot HYP, their acceptance rates would be kept within a certain range also. It’s not anti-Asian for the sake of being anti-Asian. It’s anti–homogeneity or anti–over-representation.

Also, while Asians seem to feel the American system makes it hard on Asians, clearly non-Asians in WWP feel the Asians are making it too hard on them. Did the intense drive for achievement in the Asian-American culture come first, leading to exceptional Asian academic success and thus the need for Asians to be better and better to stand out from among other Asians? Or did they first fail to succeed here in America due to white prejudice, which then pushed them into achievement over-drive and ultimate success? The author suggests it’s the latter, but I’m not certain she’s correct. If we look at immigration patterns in the last 50 years, we see that highly educated Asians were brought here by American companies for well-paying jobs in IT and research science. Did we really not give them opportunity, forcing them to work hard? Or were they hard-working first?

[ucbalumnus]

The link in reply #973 has a link to the following article:
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/08/13/white-definitions-merit-and-admissions-change-when-they-think-about-asian-americans
It refers to the following paper:
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=8935434&fileId=S1742058X1300012X

@Scott Jaschik in Inside Higher Ed

Frank L. Samson, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Miami, thinks his new research findings suggest that the definition of meritocracy used by white people is far more fluid than many would admit, and that this fluidity results in white people favoring certain policies (and groups) over others.

Specifically, he found, in a survey of white California adults, they generally favor admissions policies that place a high priority on high school grade-point averages and standardized test scores. But when these white people are focused on the success of Asian-American students, their views change.

The white adults in the survey were also divided into two groups. Half were simply asked to assign the importance they thought various criteria should have in the admissions system of the University of California. The other half received a different prompt, one that noted that Asian Americans make up more than twice as many undergraduates proportionally in the UC system as they do in the population of the state.

When informed of that fact, the white adults favor a reduced role for grade and test scores in admissions – apparently based on high achievement levels by Asian-American applicants.

@Frank L. Samson in abstract of paper

As the White populace in the United States moves toward numerical minority status by 2042, how might Whites respond to impending threat of losing their dominant group position? In particular, how will Whites react at selective, elite universities, where Asians are increasingly prominent and other non-Whites are maintaining or capturing a larger share of enrollments? Drawing on group position theory, I test White commitment to meritocracy as a public policy, using a survey-based experiment (599 California adult residents) to examine the importance grade point average should have in public university admissions. Whites decrease the importance that grade point average should have when Asian group threat is primed. However, White Californians increase the importance that grade point average should have when thinking about group threat from either Blacks or Blacks and Asians simultaneously. Ethnoracial outgroup threat shifts White support for meritocracy in different directions.

In other words, one’s definition of “merit” may be influenced by whether one believes that s/he will have a personal benefit from that definition, or whether one believes that s/he will benefit from it through group membership. (Although the study involved surveying only white people, it is entirely possible that this behavior is not restricted to white people.)