[hintymad]

It can be permanent. In addition to the effort of removing standard tests, education reforms are happening left and right. San Francisco school union recently decided to remove fast tracks. The union will also delay the teaching of geometry to grade 9, which IMHO will make teaching physics and algebra really hard.

I can understand that the motivation of such reform is to improve equity, as numerous studies have shown positive correlation between family income and testing scores. Therefore, lowering the difficulty of challenging courses and removing requirements of standard tests appear to be a natural choice towards better equity. Besides, many of us do not need advanced math or STEM in our profession anyway, why spend so much time on STEM, right?

That said, I don't see how such reform will lead to more equity. Studying and taking tests are probably the most inexpensive activities out there. All that a driven student needs to learn well is a library, a good teacher, and a few like-minded classmates. And tutoring school does not necessarily make a difference, either. But with all the reforms, what would happen? Here is what I can imagine:

  - Tutoring schools will make more difference. Family with means will send their kids to 
    tutoring schools so their kids can learn geometry or algebra in grade 5 and have all 
    the time to study AP courses in high school. Who suffers? Smart kids from poor families. 
    Same goes for history, writing, English, and etc. 


  - Money will matter more. Families with means will send their kids to robotics camps, 
    science research labs, coding schools, professional sports coaches, and etc. 
    You know, things that poor families have a hard time to afford. With non-differentiating
    test scores, guess what school admission officers will look at? 

I really don't see how good intention in this case will help less privileged kids. Such reform is advantageous to my ids, as I'll simply send them to private schools, all kinds of camps, or tutoring schools. They will learn calculus in grade 7 or early if they are talented. They will have a bucket list of volunteering experience and so-called leadership proof in their resume. They will build their ML-powered robots or conduct their favorite chemistry/physics experiments in their private lab that I can help build, if they are interested. And in the worse case, my wife and I have no problem and plenty of time to home school my kids. Yet it still pains me to see potentially hundreds of thousands of kids who would get better chance but can't because of watered-down education.

And I'll be happy if someone could show me how wrong I am.

[silicon2401]

As someone who grow up with very few opportunities, accelerated programs and standardized tests were far and away the single biggest reason I was able to go from growing up poor and without any connections to a top 10 school and then a great career in software. In turn, that's allowed me to support my family in everything from mentoring to financial support.

This is a heartbreaking example of how some people today take equality to mean taking everyone down rather than trying to bring everyone up. Or in other words, "they don't love the poor, they just hate the rich"

[thanhhaimai]

> "delay the teaching of geometry to grade 9"

This part shocks me a little bit. All kids in Vietnam start geometry at grade 6. I have a hard time comprehend what is the difference that makes kids in a developing countries can learn things 3 years ahead of a developed countries.

[panda88888]

I agree. Compared to extracurriculars, SAT/ACT test prep is (was?) probably the most cost effective way of improving the chance of admissions for low-income students. It is possible to significantly improve the score simply by being familiar with the test format and a few test-taking strategies, and this is all doable even with just a SAT prep book and a timer.

[flowerlad]

> positive correlation between family income and testing scores

Correlation != causation.

One of the best SAT prep available today is https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/sat and that is free for everyone.

Standardized tests are important, otherwise students are not evaluated using a uniform criteria. GPAs can be compared only within the same school district.

Even the curriculum is not standardized across states. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Core_implementation_by_...

[Natsu]

I think we'll actually see more of a divide as those who are motivated to study on their own go through online programs like OCW and use that knowledge to do impressive things in lieu of credentialing themselves (though they may also leverage the impressive things to get credentials).

The hard part will be that the poorer folks won't have the same luxury of free time to study like this.

So in the end I'm not sure that we'll really escape from Matthew's Law ("the rich get richer and the poor get poorer").

[bigbillheck]

> The union will also delay the teaching of geometry to grade 9

That's when I took it as a youth and nobody in either of the school districts I went to around those years took it any earlier.

(For non-North Americans, 9th grade is 14-15yo).

(And did you mean 'board' instead of 'union'?)

EDIT: Some basic googling isn't coming up with anything about this, the closest I've found is SF high schools delaying algebra 1 until 9th grade, but with an option for kids to take both algebra 1 and geometry at the same time (or algebra 2 and geometry at the same time). Details at https://www.sfusdmath.org/high-school-pathways.html

> I'll simply send them to private schools, all kinds of camps, or tutoring schools. They will learn calculus in grade 7 or early if they are talented. They will have a bucket list of volunteering experience and so-called leadership proof in their resume. They will build their ML-powered robots or conduct their favorite chemistry/physics experiments in their private lab that I can help build, if they are interested. And in the worse case, my wife and I have no problem and plenty of time to home school my kids.

Sounds like a great way to give them one hell of a complex.

I've had co-workers who were parents of kids in the Princeton NJ school district (and adjacent districts) and from what they say it is an incredibly stressful and competitive experience. On the opposite coast, there's a reason kids in Palo Alto are killing themselves so much more than elsewhere.

[hintymad]

Yeah, pushing kids may not always work out for kids. I used those examples to show it's possible for some kids to get advantages. That's also the reason I kept quantifying the examples with "if they are interested/talented" and etc. Maybe a reversed example is better: some kids could've stood out but didn't because they didn't have the edge of being in those camps/tutoring schools. I'm already seeing such trend: kids are in arm race of taking as many APs as possible. Kids rush to STEM contests, and etc. Schools can take out challenges, but the competitions won't stop simply because top-quality education is a scarce resource.

[ryandrake]

I get this but can’t bear to not participate!

The world is very quickly bifurcating into 1. a small professional elite and 2. poverty for the rest. The middle class is going away, and with it, jobs and dignity for B, C, and D students.

As a parent I feel if I don’t go into six figure debt paying for camps, tutors, sports, accelerated this, and advanced that, then there is some other parent doing this whose kid will take her spot on the train. Id be dooming her to a future of poverty.

College placement is a highly competitive, zero sum slugfest and for her sake I need to at least try.

[dragonwriter]

> The union will also delay the teaching of geometry to grade 9, which IMHO will make teaching physics and algebra really hard.

In the usual secondary sequence, Geometry is between Algebra I and Algebra II; doing it in 9th grade, even with a full year precalc after Algebra II, gets you to Calculus I in 12th. with a combined Algebra II/Trig and no separate precalc, which has long been thr common accelerated course, it gets you to Calculus II.

Physics in high school is typically non-calculus based and works well alongside precalc or calc I or even Algebra II; there’s no difficulty having it in 11th/12th with geometry in 9th.

It may create problems keeping mathematically advanced students engaged, it doesn’t create problems teaching algebra or physics.

[scarmig]

AP Physics is calculus based.

Some other points:

1) SFUSD actually delayed Algebra 1 until 9th grade, not just Geometry.

2) This choice was a bit silly, but beginning algebra concepts are still being taught in middle school. The title of the course is less relevant than the actual content, and this was less of a radical change than the course title makes it sound.

3) The actual issue is that SFUSD eliminated algebra tracking, and for ideological reasons thinks that students who are ready to study calculus in 8th grade must be put into the same classes as students who are struggling with basic arithmetic. Every student has special needs, and it's a disservice to all of them to pretend that a single unified curriculum and classroom is equally suitable to all students.

[souprock]

There are 4 different physics tests currently offered for AP.

Calculus based: AP Physics C Mechanics, AP Physics C E&M

No calculus: AP Physics 1, AP Physics 2

Of course you would need the one with calculus to get credit that works for any STEM major. Without calculus, you aren't likely to get more than a generic science credit.

[hintymad]

When I was taking high-school physics, we started without calculus, but we definitely needed geometry. Otherwise, one wouldn't be able to work on free body diagram, circular motion, optics, and etc, as all of them involves trigonometry and some basic geometry.