I set a goal of overcoming the biggest problem our students have faced with Calculus, the language demands. Many of my students have found the calculation demands to be reasonable, but stumble on the words. That has been the feedback from three rounds of AP exams so far. This year those complaints still registered, but not has high as before. Upon examination of the 2017 questions, I think we're making big gains in accessibility. This is a reflection on what I think I achieved with my instruction.

When I say accessible I mean a) the topic was addressed in class b) kids had thorough practice and c) kids had the pieces to apply a skill on their own. In no way do I attempt to feed them infinite scenarios and create long long lists of steps. The goal is a focus on big ideas to allow them to be comfortable and adapt what they know to different situations. Also when I say accessible there is no guarantee kids actually converted that into correctness. There are too many variables with a students preparation to really know.

Based on number of question parts present (1a and 1b counted separately. etc), in my opinion I think this is how accessibility broke down:

Screen Shot 2017-05-15 at 8.21.55 PM.png

I was very happy with the level of familiarity my students should have had this year. I made some strides in improving the way we covered information to improve our struggles with the language barriers. Post exam conversations bore that out. Yes, it was difficult, but the majority said they recognized a lot.

Just as a reminder that accessibility doesn't mean correctness, my non-1 rate for 2015 was 8% and 10% for 2016. For all the gains in accessibility the non-1 rate this year could be, like, 20% max or something, or worse. The road is long, but we're moving.

AuthorJonathan Claydon