My D22 chose to take Calc AB (as a junior) rather than BC, and chose to take AP Stats as a senior rather than BC or Linear Algebra, both of which she was approved for. The math teachers at the HS aren’t great and her friends who took the higher level math classes largely taught themselves. She was not motivated to do that. She didn’t care that it made her non-competitive for say, Ivy League, since she’d already decided she wasn’t interested in those schools. The pandemic was raging and she was already stressed. She prioritized art, music and dance over math. She no doubt could have managed the higher level math classes, possibly with tutoring. She got A’s in the math classes she took, including the year she doubled up. But she didn’t enjoy it and we supported her choices. Both accelerating and pulling back were driven by her though of course she was younger when she was accelerated and undoubtedly influenced by parents, peers and teachers. And as her calc teacher (also her Alg II teacher, small school) who wrote one of her college rec letters - reminded us, only a very small percentage of students in the US make it to calc in HS, much less as a junior, and she’d be fine. But yes, if she’d been gunning for say, Yale, I have no doubt she would have needed to take BC as a junior and linear algebra as a senior (as well as AP Physics which she also opted out of).
I firmly am in the camp of meeting kids where they are and finding the college that fits their profile when they are HS juniors, rather than trying to shape/mold them into an accelerated track in middle school (or sometimes even sooner).
The chair of my D’s HS’s math department was a strong proponent in establishing strong math foundations and if the class was getting bored, they would introduce more depth or new topics. As such, the school did not promote DE classes and wouldn’t accept summer or DE courses to move ahead. That was noted in the school profile and the counselor’s notes.
My D’s AP calc class senior year had the top STEM students in it so they really did breeze through the curriculum (there were 40 students in the class and all 40 got 5s on the AP exam) so by March the teacher (who had a PhD in math) was teaching concepts for Calc III to help their transition to college.
I realize that it was a gift to have that kind of curriculum flexibility but I’d love to see a model where that was happening everywhere (I know, I know, not enough resources but one can dream!).
My impression is that state schools, even the most prestigious, are much more apt to admit students that have maxed their school’s offerings and aren’t necessarily looking for students who accelerated beyond. My D knew engineering students in college who never took calc in HS because it wasn’t offered and there was no DE option. Heck, she knew someone who didn’t even have pre calc offered at their rural HS (although he came to campus early and took precalc in the summer to catch up). Those students weren’t penalized and just started in Calc I. It’s still very possible to graduate on time as an engineer if you begin with Calc I first semester of college freshman year. That is actually still today the expected course sequence if you look up the four year plan of study.
Even if the reason for that was middle school math placement and school policy, rather than a conscious choice made in 11th/12th grade?
Agree here…
But that implies that the middle school math placement decision could have potentially high stakes later if the student applies to highly selective colleges, correct? That gives incentive for tiger parents to push for maximum math acceleration in middle school for this purpose, even if that is not the student’s “natural” math level.
Or even earlier - in our schools, a lot depends on the placement that the elementary school/5th grade teacher suggests for math. I knew someone whose kid tried to test into the +1 (algebra 1 in 8th grade) stream during middle school and it was apparently a really tough test - kid didn’t make it in. Then the only other real option to jump is summer school geometry during HS (the only math course the high school allows for progression over summer), but that track still “only” gets you to AB by senior year (need geo H for the alg2/precalc H track and there is no H option in summer school)
So bottom line working back, what you are going to start getting (well…it’s there already from what I understand) is that parents of 5th graders are pushing for acceleration. This is just insane to me. Maybe it’s more common to people who grew up /schooled here themselves.
I would say sometimes yes. It’s all contextual. For example, if half the class has AP calc BC and a student took AB that’s likely not going to go well in some colleges’ admission decisions. Again, talking about highly selective admissions as per your OP.
Yep on both counts.
With that said there are exceptions like I said in my post. Some schools will say ‘take highest math available to you’…this is the out to admit kids who didn’t place well in middle school.
Some students might have strengths that can compensate for relatively light math rigor at some of the schools we are talking about.
Some students coming from strong HSs or feeder HSs might have better results than a similar student from a different HS.
Admissions at these schools is holistic, hence the many examples posters have shared here about students without max math rigor being admitted to x school.
As much as some try to put admission decision making in a box, that just doesn’t work. There are very few hard and fast ‘rules’ in holistic admissions. But there are patterns to be sure.
And as much as people don’t want there to be ‘unfairness’ in holistic admissions, there sometimes is.
The original post did not mention business or engineering. My kid dropped a level in math (the opposite of the acceleration being discussed here) during high school because our small school created scheduling conflicts and they wanted to take music theory (which was life-changing; they have a PhD in music). The guidance counselor explained this to colleges. I have to say, that being one of the top students was a lot better than being one of the less capable in a class: they learned so much by teaching other students, which was encouraged by the teacher. Yes they did a lot of music which helps with Harvard and others.
One of my other kids took calculus and physics in high school and got 5’s on the AP’s. The physics teacher had just had twins and also apparently had narcolepsy so he was mostly asleep in a room next door. My kid and the 4 other students got a textbook on their own, and found an uncle of one student who knew some physics. My kid did well, as I wrote before, but he retook both physics and calculus intro classes as a Brown CS major. If a student doesn’t have access to good calculus or physics classes or instruction, they can take those intro classes once on campus.
Both of these kids got into Ivies but it had nothing to do with academic rigor. They met a benchmark I suppose. If a kid is stressed by acceleration in math, or if it takes a lot of their time, and admission to top schools is a goal (it wasn’t for us actually), then a better use of time might be extracurriculars, volunteering, working, interning, studying etc. etc. outside of school, if they are genuine interests vs math. If they like math, math team is a great activity, and humbling.
Do you mean in contrast to other countries? Tracking starts around that age in Germany, and I believe also in some other European countries (?)
What other school systems allow for such vast differences in math levels during high school as you see in the US?
I have not lived in Germany, so it is all hearsay for me, but my understanding is that their tracking system is much more comprehensive than just differences in math levels. Kids on the vocational path do not attend high schools with a college preparatory curriculum.
But it seems to vary by high school what is available when you get into +1 acceleration. The school my kids are at has AB as a pre-req for BC, so a student taking Algebra 1 in 8th grade will only reach AB a a senior. So being judged on half of your classmates taking BC while you took AB is a judgment based on a decision your school (or your parents, if they opted not to allow the recommended acceleration) made at the end of 6th grade on your behalf. I would like to think there is a lot more nuance in admissions decisions for circumstances like that.
Oh, sure, but for those who are on the college track, is there such a vast difference? And does it make a huge difference for college entrance? I mean, i may be out of touch but in the UK afaik it’s you may or may not be on the A-level math track, and then there’s math and further math as the only differentiation. Not anything from precalc to whatever the +4 track is here by senior year.
Parents should “push” their schools, teachers, districts, and administration for high quality math instruction including advanced, honors, AP, and IB.
They should “push” back against the notion of math equity, or teaching to the lowest common denominator. https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/in-the-battle-over-early-algebra-parents-are-winning-9f52ea5f
They should not “push” their kids. Encourage, advise, incentivize, cajole but not “push”.
Not among kids on the college track. But my understanding is that a minority of kids in Germany are placed on the college track.
Middle school level tracking in the US is our haphazard version of the tracking that happens in other countries. Parents are essentially worrying that their kids are not being placed on the college track (or the “good college track”).
Precalc in senior year is college track. This conversation is quite clearly something different… of course it links back to the college admissions system here.
Many years ago, I spoke with a curriculum director in a high-performing (i.e., good tax base) public K-12 system. They had do do longitudinal studies on changes they made, and at one point, they found that kids who went through a revamped elementary math program were taking calc at 2x the rate of thr kids who had gone through the older program. This always comes to mind when I hear about tracking. Sure, math comes more easily to some than others, but to what extent do schools also teach math in a way that innate ability has to be the differentiator?
I just want to note again this thread is focused on highly selective college admissions. In the big picture, the US has a glut of college seats. No one has to play the highly selective admissions game and the majority don’t/can’t.
Sure. But there are other top universities worldwide that don’t have the same arms race to get in. (And some countries that do have equally unhealthy pressure on students in terms of national school leaving exams, I am aware.) but I agree, that’s a different discussion than whether or not you should be pushing your kid onto a particular math track in 5th grade.
I don’t think the US system has anything close to equal levels of ‘unhealthy pressure’ that countries with the national exams have. In those countries, the vast majority of students are affected by these exams.
I don’t know what unis/countries you are talking about, but some top unis in some countries have relatively more seats as a proportion of college matriculants than the top colleges in US do. Those top unis in other countries are also likely not practicing holistic admissions, which keeps a lid on the number of applicants.
Exactly -like i said, a different discussion.
Math equity can mean automatically placing students in more advanced math courses based on prior class or test performance, in order to appropriately place students from lower SES etc. families who might otherwise miss out on advancement because their parents are not in the know about lobbying for advancement in more discretionary environments. This is the opposite of the lowest common denominator.