math placement letters

If your kid has been offered a space in Accelerated, than I STRONGLY urge you to accept it! I cannot think of a good reason not to, nor do I know anyone who ever regretted it, but perhaps others have different experiences.

Someone mentioned "sink or swim" but we did not experience that at all.

And, it seemed that this group generally got really great math teachers in high school. Also, when scheduling permitted, there was quite a bit of "looping". My kid had the same (great!) math teacher all four years at CHS as a result. (But I know of some who didn't like that teacher, but were able to get their student moved to the "other" teacher for that cohort and also did very well as far as I know.)

From the little experience I have with Honors math and Accelerated math, I believe that Accelerated explores the same topics in greater depth and at a quicker pace. That said, it is problematic that the Honors track does not advance to Calculus. In my opinion, there should be more of an effort to get more kids into the former 8th grade Level 5 (not sure what it is called now) as well as the Accelerated track. When my older kid was moving up from elementary to middle school there was no summer step up to get into Accelerated. I am happy to see that this new program is getting more kids into the advanced track. But perhaps, we should be looking at the elementary curriculum and instruction to see how we can move more kids up without needing these summer programs.

Janea, your experience is very helpful. The question is when is appropriate to accelerate them if they are strong in math--at the sixth grade, seventh grade mark, or even a bit later. And my own beef--whether the middle school teaching is adequate to lead toward that acceleration. I find that many students can be strong in algebra, but geometry is really a swing in another direction for them and it can be hard. I am not sure that performance in geometry has all that much bearing on the other sequences in math, but I am not an expert.

sac said:

And, it seemed that this group generally got really great math teachers in high school. Also, when scheduling permitted, there was quite a bit of "looping". My kid had the same (great!) math teacher all four years at CHS as a result. (But I know of some who didn't like that teacher, but were able to get their student moved to the "other" teacher for that cohort and also did very well as far as I know.)

This is not necessarily the case now at CHS.

dg64 said:
From the little experience I have with Honors math and Accelerated math, I believe that Accelerated explores the same topics in greater depth and at a quicker pace. That said, it is problematic that the Honors track does not advance to Calculus. In my opinion, there should be more of an effort to get more kids into the former 8th grade Level 5 (not sure what it is called now) as well as the Accelerated track. When my older kid was moving up from elementary to middle school there was no summer step up to get into Accelerated. I am happy to see that this new program is getting more kids into the advanced track. But perhaps, we should be looking at the elementary curriculum and instruction to see how we can move more kids up without needing these summer programs.

The honors track DOES go to calculus for those students who, after completing 7th grade math, are placed in 8th grade Advanced Honors math. (What used to be called Level 5.) Those 8th grade students (who also have the accelerated 7th graders in class with them, I believe) complete Algebra I that year and then take Geometry 1 the following year at CHS, followed by Algebra 2, Precalc and Calc. I don't recall the exact criteria for Advanced Honors 8th grade math, but they probably need an A average in 7th grade math at least.

And, there are other ways to get to calculus by taking summer school or doubling up Algebra 2 and Geometry at CHS.

That being said, I believe that the Honors (not Advanced Honors) 8th grade math ought to complete the Algebra 1 curriculum and allow students who perform well in that course to enroll in Geometry the following year.

Accelerated math is not right for all and maybe even not right for most. My oldest was in accelerated math before step up classes existed when there were only 10 kids from each middle school. My youngest is in honors now in 7th grade. It is the right place for him. Remember accelerated gets you to calculus as a Junior. I think that dg64 is correct that more emphasis should be placed into getting ore kids to calculus as a senior. What steps are needed are probably beefing up elementary instruction and getting more kids into advanced honors for 8th grade

mtam said:
Janea, your experience is very helpful. The question is when is appropriate to accelerate them if they are strong in math--at the sixth grade, seventh grade mark, or even a bit later. And my own beef--whether the middle school teaching is adequate to lead toward that acceleration. I find that many students can be strong in algebra, but geometry is really a swing in another direction for them and it can be hard. I am not sure that performance in geometry has all that much bearing on the other sequences in math, but I am not an expert.

In my opinion, they should accelerate at the earliest point they are given the opportunity. The farther along they get, the harder it is to accelerate although there are still opportunities to do so. Sixth grade math has a LOT of review and high-performing fifth graders who skip to seventh grade math don't miss much at all topic-wise. Those who skip seventh grade miss a bit more (and I observed several in that cohort in my kid's class who dropped back at some point later.) After that, the only way to accelerate is to double up either by taking one of the classes in summer school or to take Geometry and Algebra 2 at the same time during Sophomore year of high school. (Those two classes don't overlap in topics much, but taking two math classes in addition to everything else can be a pretty heavy load.)

Yes, I am aware of the fact that there are those other opportunities. But to me it makes little sense to call it Honors and not simply make that a clear track toward Calculus. From our experience, there are too many other potholes along the way--problems in the middle school sequencing, uneven math teaching at the middle school, the requirement that you need, I believe, an A to qualify for the summer course in Geometry, when many B students are perfectly capable of doing the summer course and proceeding ahead. If I trusted what was ahead more for those who did not make Accelerated, perhaps I would not be so concerned.

Thanks sac, very useful.

Last year we had questions about our son's math placement and eventually reached Dr. Beattys on the phone (it took a few days because she's fielding hundreds of such calls the week the letters go out). She walked us through all of the scores in detail and the reasoning behind the placement. We did succeed in getting him placed in a summer class as a result of the call, so it was a good outcome.

One piece of advice -- don't rely on email to try and get a response. It may take a while, but you'll eventually get all your answers with a phone call.

compmama said:
Not a single child from Clinton placed into the Accelerated program this year. My son, with perfect 4th grade NJASK math scores (300), and excellent scores in CA-5 (all 4s), placed into the Honors program. As we all know, there were serious problems (again) with several questions in the 6th grade Placement test and apparently those questions were eliminated from assessment but as someone mentioned, there is absolutely no transparency about the test itself. I'm reaching out to Candice Beattys for some clarification and answers.

I did not know there were problems with the 6th Grade Placement tests. What problems were there? My son insists that for some of the questions there was no correct answer. Was he right? He said it completely threw him.

He's been doing really well in the NJASK and class tests (high 90s) so does anyone know, what test scores are the kids who are going into Accelerated getting?

compmama said:
Not a single child from Clinton placed into the Accelerated program this year. My son, with perfect 4th grade NJASK math scores (300), and excellent scores in CA-5 (all 4s), placed into the Honors program. As we all know, there were serious problems (again) with several questions in the 6th grade Placement test and apparently those questions were eliminated from assessment but as someone mentioned, there is absolutely no transparency about the test itself. I'm reaching out to Candice Beattys for some clarification and answers.

What is the source of the info that not a single Clinton 5th grader was offered the accelerated option? If accurate, that is fairly disturbing given that anywhere from 10-20 (from what I understand) district 5th graders are offered this option.

According to Dr. Beattys, 4th grade NJASK scores do not count that much in the district's overall assessment. The two main factors are the CA-5 tests (given out over the course of the year) and the 6th grade Placement Test (especially the latter.)

5th grade topics and the 6th grade topics are essentially the same, except that in 6th grade they delve in much deeper to prepare them for the 7th grade Intro to Algebra. The fact that no Clinton 5th grader was placed into accelerated (if confirmed) is worrying because it suggests that Clinton math teachers may not be adequately addressing the needs of advanced students who are ready for a deeper exploration of 5th grade content areas (as they would in 6th grade). This may be why I hear of many 5th graders who do very well at NJASK and CA-5 tests (like compmama's child) but do not perform well enough on PT to place into the accelerated track.

hiraeth, your son is correct. There were several multiple choice questions to which there were no correct answers. Apparently the district eliminated those questions from their calculations when they scored the test.

No one knows the Math PT scores but the district, so it would be interesting to find out the scores of those who were placed into the Accelerated program. Like I said, not a single one of the high performing students made it into the Accelerated level.

xavier67, the source of the information is my 5th grader who confirmed that none of the kids who are at the top of the class in math placed into the Accelerated program; they placed into Honors. Now, could there be one or two he doesn't know about? Of course. But that doesn't change much statistically and I agree that it is worrisome.

The Clinton 5th grade class my son was in was a bit of disaster this year and that may have an impact on the overall quality of teaching but I never doubted the math instruction, which is why his placement is such a surprise to us all. I am seriously confused about the process and the lack of transparency in the district.

compmama said:
hiraeth, your son is correct. There were several multiple choice questions to which there were no correct answers. Apparently the district eliminated those questions from their calculations when they scored the test.
No one knows the Math PT scores but the district, so it would be interesting to find out the scores of those who were placed into the Accelerated program. Like I said, not a single one of the high performing students made it into the Accelerated level.

Wow, just wow! I owe my son an apology. He said he wrote in the correct answers and picked the answer closest to the correct answer. But doesn't that undermine the whole test given the level of uncertainty that would introduce into a student's thought process while doing the test?

I'm just amazed that a test of this importance can go out with such basic mistakes. I believe this gives further weight for us to know what the scoring criteria was for the different placements as it appears a lot of weight was put on this apparently flawed test

I agree that it's completely appalling and irresponsible of the district to create flawed tests. I can just imagine the psychological effect on the students, particularly the ones who are not very confident about their abilities. It's heartening know your son was astute enough to write in the correct answer. My son pointed out the mistake to the teacher who then advised him to write down his own answer. And mind you, my son's math teacher mentioned that the test was even more flawed last year and there was naturally quite an uproar about it. Clearly the district has not learned much from their mistakes.

Perhaps it's time for us to make some noise about this. I'm waiting to speak to Dr. Beattys to get some real answers.

On April 9, the district sent an email about math placement to all 5th grade parents. It contained 2 attachments, including one with the specific objective criteria used to determine math placement. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to cut and paste from the PDF.

yonti23 said:
On April 9, the district sent an email about math placement to all 5th grade parents. It contained 2 attachments, including one with the specific objective criteria used to determine math placement. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to cut and paste from the PDF.

Yes, the criteria are:

- Fifth Grad Common Assessments (CA-5)

- Sixth Grade Placement Test (PT-6)

- NJASK Grade 4 math score

We know the scores for the CA-5 and NJASK. My concern is what weight is being given to the PT-6 when, as discussed above, it was a flawed test and it seems that students averaging around 90% or above for the NJASK and CA-5 have not been place in Advanced Math.

Hiraeth - The email lists the specific percentage/score thresholds:

"Criteria for student identification for Acceleration in order to skip grade 6 math
o A 93% average on CA-5, a 93% subset score on CA-5, score of 250+ on NJASK4*, and PT-6 score of 90% with 7 points on acceleration items. OR
o A 90% average on CA-5, a 90% subset score on CA-5, score of 240+ on NJASK4*, and PT-6 score of 90% with 8 points on acceleration items. OR
o An 88% average on CA-5, an 88% subset score on CA-5, score of 235+ on NJASK4*, PT-6 of 80% with 10 points on acceleration items and participation and successful performance (B average) in summer program. OR
o New students with a minimum PT-6 score of 90% with 8 points on acceleration items"

Yes, I somehow missed that April 9th letter but found it. One can get pretty specific information about the criteria. Xavier67, that's an interesting analysis about the Accelerated. I know there was a cohort in my kid's class that basically finished ST math months and months ago, and were ready for deeper lessons, or even something that took them beyond and the teacher had to seek out materials on her own for those students. I'm not sure how successful that was.

Here is the district webpage on 6th grade math placement:

http://www.somsd.k12.nj.us/Page/3329

Here are the regulations and policy for math placement (detailed info on necessary test scores):

http://www.somsd.k12.nj.us/cms/lib7/NJ01001050/Centricity/Domain/148/r2314.pdf

Yonti23 - thank you for pasting the scoring criteria. I appreciate it. I am still trying to find and wade through the pertinent information on the district website

It would be helpful if the district also communicated the PT-6 score so we weren't in the dark about that.

If you email Ms. Grierson or Dr. Beattys, they'll send you all of the scores for your child.

http://www.somsd.k12.nj.us/cms/lib7/NJ01001050/Centricity/Domain/148/r2314.pdf

hiraeth said:
I am still trying to find and wade through the pertinent information on the district website

I think the link above is outdated, since that's back when it was levels 2,3,4, etc. Part of what's frustrating is that there are a lot of either dead links or old information up on the website. And what is there isn't easily navigated.

So I have a question: the 'next' time a student might be up for acceleration is after sixth grade, again they take a test, and also based on grades, and they jump to algebra and skip 7th grade pre-algebra? So they do Algebra in 7th grade and geometry in 8th, like the other accelerated kids? Or have I got that wrong? Or, if qualified, do they jump after 7th grade to Algebra in 8th grade and then do Geometry in 9th? Or am I talking about 2 different trajectories?

I must admit to being confused.

It is my understanding that in 8th grade there are 4 levels in math (as opposed to 3 in 6th and 7th). The top two levels have the kids tracked to take calculus by 11th or 12th grade. There is a chart that we received last year that shows levels and progress through HS graduation. If I can find it I will scan and post or link to it here. The chart was very helpful.

I have heard that the district significantly cut back on the number of kids placed in accelerated for the current 6th graders. I think there was only one accelerated class at SOMS this year. My son, who has always excelled in math and who did extremely well on the NJASK, was placed in honors in 6th grade and was not given the option to take the summer class. I have to assume that he received a low score on the 6th Grade Placement test. We didn't push to have him take accelerated math because we felt that he was going to have so many other challenges just getting used to middle school. We definitely made the right decision for him. He did qualify to take an exam, based upon his math grades this year, to determine if he moves up to accelerated next year.

We would just like to see him take calculus by the time he graduates HS. If he isn't bumped up next year, he still has a chance in 8th grade as long as he is one of the top two levels.

Both my kids are doing the accelerated math programs (one did the step-up and the other was placed into the program) and stayed in the level 5 classes for one year before dropping back down to level four in the accelerated track. I.e. my 8th grader is still taking geometry but at level 4 instead of 5. As example, in level 5, you have to figure out conjectures while in level 4 they are given to you and you have to explain them.

The math does get harder starting with Geometry. As an example for the Algebra 2 class, the level 5 teacher that my tenth grader had gave 20 minute quizzes, 10 problems, go ! Either you got it or you didn't.

I would recommend it if your child likes math, likes a challenge and with the understanding, you get always drop back down to level 4 and stay in the accelerated path.

RCH

mtam said:
I think the link above is outdated, since that's back when it was levels 2,3,4, etc. Part of what's frustrating is that there are a lot of either dead links or old information up on the website. And what is there isn't easily navigated.
So I have a question: the 'next' time a student might be up for acceleration is after sixth grade, again they take a test, and also based on grades, and they jump to algebra and skip 7th grade pre-algebra? So they do Algebra in 7th grade and geometry in 8th, like the other accelerated kids? Or have I got that wrong? Or, if qualified, do they jump after 7th grade to Algebra in 8th grade and then do Geometry in 9th? Or am I talking about 2 different trajectories?
I must admit to being confused.

You are talking about 2 slightly different tracks:

1. Kid skips 7th grade Pre-algebra and takes Algebra 1 in 7th grade, Geometry at the high school in 8th grade. Has to take test at end of 6th grade to accelerate to this level. This, group if they stay in the same track, would take Calculus in 11th grade.

2. Kid takes 7th grade Pre-algebra. Based on grades is put in Level 5 (Adv. Honors) in 8th grade taking Algebra 1, Geometry in 9th grade. This group, if they stay in the same track, would take Calculus in 12th grade.

This year at SOMS, many of the kids in Acc. 7th and Adv. Honors 8th are in the same class. Kind of middle school multi-age class.

Also, according to my middle schooler, a large number of kids accelerated this year after 6th grade. Right now, I believe there are about 4 combined sections of acc. 7th and adv. honors 8th grade kids.

Wow, this is so helpful. I have stared at that chart numerous times but actually this board has made everything so much clearer. If there were vectors or arrows as I've seen for other schools, that showed the different paths, at different junctures, i.e. a test in 6th that might bump you to 8th grade geometry, or what grades one needs, it would be so much clearer for me. When you stare at the chart you have to assume the ways that kids 'jump' levels. It really isn't obvious.

And it's useful to know that they seem to be contracting the cohort of 6th graders accelerating, since a few years back they'd expanded it. I too have heard of high achieving math students who neither placed into the accelerated nor were invited to the summer step up program.