Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » Professional Associations » nyshsmath

Topic: Pathetic
Replies: 26   Last Post: Jun 25, 2010 5:01 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Sharon

Posts: 409
From: NYC
Registered: 6/26/05
Re: Alg 2 / Trig
Posted: Jun 24, 2010 8:45 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply
att1.html (7.6 K)

There will not be changes. Take my word for it. If you can remember back to the beginning of Math A/B, when it proved itself a total failure, the state said they wouldn't change the course until they "used up the materials which takes about 10 years". And guess what? Ten years. Bingo.

Total stupidity.

Sharon










-----Original Message-----
From: barnsky@optonline.net
To: nyshsmath@mathforum.org
Cc: nyshsmath@mathforum.org
Sent: Thu, Jun 24, 2010 8:35 pm
Subject: Alg 2 / Trig


Do you think there will be any changes to the Alg 2/Trig curriculum?? Why isn't NYSED doing something about this?? I taught an advanced class and they did very nicely on the regents BUT it was CRAZY all year. I completed the course BUT I felt so bad for them. It isn't fair to them or to me!!! Next year, I will be teaching a regular class and I am VERY nervous. How will they handle the speed when they don't have the same work ethic???

----- Original Message -----
From: Angela Samul
Date: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:28 pm
Subject: Re: Pathetic
To: nyshsmath@mathforum.org

> Well said, Jonathan!
>
>
> --- On Thu, 6/24/10, Jonathan wrote:
>
>
> From: Jonathan
> Subject: Re: Pathetic
> To: nyshsmath@mathforum.org
> Date: Thursday, June 24, 2010, 8:03 PM
>
>
>
> With all due respect,
>
> I've served on that committee. Pearson forced us to sign a
> confidentiality agreement, and then refused to clarify what
> parts of the process were covered by the agreement, so I will
> try to be careful.
>
> But the very existence of the committee calls into question the
> competence of the SED people responsible for creating the
> curriculum (or non-curriculum) and the assessment.
>
> James, is the Algebra exam a measure of whether kids know
> "Algebra?" Is it a measure of whether kids know enough to move
> on to the next level of mathematics? Is it a measure of whether
> kids know a NY State course called "Integrated Algebra"? Is it
> a measure of whether a kid knows enough math to be graduated
> from high school?
>
> We know, or we should know, that none of these is correct. The
> Integrated Algebra regents measures how well kids perform on the
> Integrated Algebra regents. Nothing else.
>
> There is no reason to give this test, except that SED requires
> it. It does not measure a useful subset of mathematics. It does
> not measure ability to function mathematically in the real
> world.
>
> So when they asked me to help set a cut score on a useless exam,
> I asked them what the value of the exam was. I asked if it was
> for measuring algebra or readiness to graduate. And I told them
> that if they can't answer that question, they should not be
> testing kids.
>
> Where we set the cuts is irrelevant if the tests are
> meaningless. And relevant only to numbers graduating if the only
> real meaning this test has is no pass = no graduate.
>
> Standard setting, with all due respect to the people who give up
> their time, standard setting for a horrible test is a horrible
> charade.
> Jonathan Halabi
> HS of American Studies
> the Bronx
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:12 AM, James Burrell
> wrote:
>
> Meaning no disrespect, unless one has served on the Standards
> Setting Committee, one has no clue what goes into the making of
> a recommendation, from NYS teachers, to the Commissioner
> regarding the cut points for 65 and 85.
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 7:15 AM, wrote:
>
>
> Well...I'll say it again. It is disgusting that the state has
> to wait to see what raw scores were before deciding on a cut
> score. This demonstrates how state is trying to manipulate
> information to demonstrate that their new program is *better*
> for the students and will result in increased passing rates. In
> reality, as we all know, the cut off for IA is so low that it
> proves nothing in terms of a student's ability to go to for
> higher math. The state must go back to preparing tests based on
> 100 points and having a *true* grade that reflects a student's
> actual, not manipulated, ability.
>
> I am so disgusted. How come the U.S. Department of Ed doesn't
> come in and clean house here? It would be welcome.
>
> Sharon
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Keller
> To: nyshsmath@mathforum.org
> Sent: Thu, Jun 24, 2010 6:01 am
> Subject: Pathetic
>
>
> Still no cut scores early Thurs am. Think they're still working
> on them, or
>
>
>
>
> just didn't get around to posting them after hours last night?
> What a sad state
>
>
> of affairs this whole Regents cut score experience is. I'm
> still spinning about
>
>
> kids getting grades in the 70's on the IA exam after leaving
> virtually all of
>
>
> the free response questions blank.
>
>
>
>
>
> *******************************************************************
>
>
> * To unsubscribe from this mailing list, email the message
>
>
> * "unsubscribe nyshsmath" to majordomo@mathforum.org
>
>
> *
>
>
> * Read prior posts and download attachments from the web
> archives at
>
>
> * http://mathforum.org/kb/forum.jspa?forumID=671
>
>
> *******************************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>





Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.