Minutes of November 3, 2003 meeting at Georgetown Day School

In attendance were Ayana Touval (CESJDS), Kathleen Glines (Edmund Burke), Anike Oliver (GDS), Margot Calcut (Holy Child), Mary Milroy (Sidwell-Middle), Betty King (Maret), Syamala Chenulu (CHDS), Karen Rose (NCS), Dorothy Prats (St.Andrew’s), Andrew Lipps (GDS-HS), Bruce Snyder (GDS-HS), Nancy Wright (WES), Beth Cole (St. Patrick's), Judy Knight (GDS-MS), Margaret Coffey (Bishop Ireton).

I must apologize if I do not give the names of the speakers who brought up each issue. It would be slightly confusing to write a discussion in that form so I am just giving the gist of what took place.
Nancy Wright started the meeting with the financial statement to date. We seem to be quite well off financially and some members seem to like paying more. It just shows how pleased they are with ISMAW.
After the self-introductions the meeting took off on sequencing of the curriculum. The question seems to be, "Is it good to have Algebra II after Algebra I or should we give a break to the students and switch to geometry?.” There did not seem to be a consensus on this (is it possible to have one?). The alternative for accelerated students could be to take Geometry in the summer and then go on to Algebra II. The other issues that seemed important was the inter-dependence of science and math, and the need to teach in a certain sequence to make learning efficient.
The issue of integration of Algebra, Geometry and Arithmetic through the Middle and High school years would maintain a good balance. This is quite the way International schools and many Asian schools operate. This develops a good sense of day-to-day math in the real world and then the students could take on areas of specialization in college. This could be made possible if the entire system could be revamped.
There was frustration among some members about the readiness of students for Algebra I and the frustration with the course requirements for college. There seems to be a general consensus on the lack of fundamental arithmetical ability in spite of all the AP courses being taken. Is the set up creating this problem? Are we going through curricula without any rationale? What is our goal? The capacity to use mathematical skills in the real world as essential for everyone and the specializations for a few, or muddling through courses just because they are requirements for college?

The next meeting will be at NCS, and the topic-Math evaluation--The TIMMS report.