Is FCPS getting rid of AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

Not necessarily. Reading is not highly correlated to intelligence. My DC has very severe dyslexia and has always read below grade level, despite years and years of intervention. They received appropriate accommodations so that they could access the material. Their accommodations included electronic textbooks, a reader and scribe for assessments, Kurzweil …. They have an aptitude for math and science. They took AAP for math and science. They went on to major in math and biology in college and are now in a PhD program in math theory.

Do not penalize students because they have a reading disability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

I'm so tired of you and your reading group story in every. single. thread about this.

I’m not pp but also saw the reality that higher reading groups met VERY infrequently with the teacher. This reality is a big part of why many parents support AAP - because we saw what happened in K-2 re: differentiation and how it worked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

Not necessarily. Reading is not highly correlated to intelligence. My DC has very severe dyslexia and has always read below grade level, despite years and years of intervention. They received appropriate accommodations so that they could access the material. Their accommodations included electronic textbooks, a reader and scribe for assessments, Kurzweil …. They have an aptitude for math and science. They took AAP for math and science. They went on to major in math and biology in college and are now in a PhD program in math theory.

Do not penalize students because they have a reading disability.

I am PP who is an AAP teacher. Not penalizing students just stating that kids who struggle with reading may struggle with SS/Science. We do a ton of reading in SS/Science. I have students with reading/writing disabilities. I am talking about how doing AAP SS/Science is not realistic for grades with huge needs in reading. For example, if you have 40 percent or more of a grade reading below grade level asking them to analyze a wordy primary source from the 1700’s will be difficult. I am quite aware of twice exceptional students but my previous post was addressing large populations of kids who struggle to read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

Why not? Get _all_ kids appropriate-level support for where they're at to help them maximize their potential/performance, regardless of whether they're ahead, behind, or on-grade.

In order to do that we would need *much* smaller class sizes. There are not only multiple learning/intelligence levels, but multiple learning styles. For a teacher to give that much attention to ALL learners, they need to be very small.

My child is in a 20ish student 2nd grade class and still doesn't get much hands-on attention because they are way above grade level and meeting all grade level standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

Not necessarily. Reading is not highly correlated to intelligence. My DC has very severe dyslexia and has always read below grade level, despite years and years of intervention. They received appropriate accommodations so that they could access the material. Their accommodations included electronic textbooks, a reader and scribe for assessments, Kurzweil …. They have an aptitude for math and science. They took AAP for math and science. They went on to major in math and biology in college and are now in a PhD program in math theory.

Do not penalize students because they have a reading disability.

I am PP who is an AAP teacher. Not penalizing students just stating that kids who struggle with reading may struggle with SS/Science. We do a ton of reading in SS/Science. I have students with reading/writing disabilities. I am talking about how doing AAP SS/Science is not realistic for grades with huge needs in reading. For example, if you have 40 percent or more of a grade reading below grade level asking them to analyze a wordy primary source from the 1700’s will be difficult. I am quite aware of twice exceptional students but my previous post was addressing large populations of kids who struggle to read.

How would you help a severely dyslexic and dysgraphia student access the primary source document from 1700 so they might analyze it? You would do the same thing for the students in the classroom with 50 or more below grade level in reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

I'm so tired of you and your reading group story in every. single. thread about this.

I’m not pp but also saw the reality that higher reading groups met VERY infrequently with the teacher. This reality is a big part of why many parents support AAP - because we saw what happened in K-2 re: differentiation and how it worked.

If your kid can read above grade level, why does he need reading groups so frequently?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

Why not? Get _all_ kids appropriate-level support for where they're at to help them maximize their potential/performance, regardless of whether they're ahead, behind, or on-grade.

In order to do that we would need *much* smaller class sizes. There are not only multiple learning/intelligence levels, but multiple learning styles. For a teacher to give that much attention to ALL learners, they need to be very small.

My child is in a 20ish student 2nd grade class and still doesn't get much hands-on attention because they are way above grade level and meeting all grade level standards.

Class size is the big issue with FCPS/AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

I'm so tired of you and your reading group story in every. single. thread about this.

I’m not pp but also saw the reality that higher reading groups met VERY infrequently with the teacher. This reality is a big part of why many parents support AAP - because we saw what happened in K-2 re: differentiation and how it worked.

If your kid can read above grade level, why does he need reading groups so frequently?

DP. What? Kids who are above grade level are just supposed to teach themselves? What's the point of sending them to school at all if the teacher isn't going to even try to teach them at their level?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

Not necessarily. Reading is not highly correlated to intelligence. My DC has very severe dyslexia and has always read below grade level, despite years and years of intervention. They received appropriate accommodations so that they could access the material. Their accommodations included electronic textbooks, a reader and scribe for assessments, Kurzweil …. They have an aptitude for math and science. They took AAP for math and science. They went on to major in math and biology in college and are now in a PhD program in math theory.

Do not penalize students because they have a reading disability.

I am PP who is an AAP teacher. Not penalizing students just stating that kids who struggle with reading may struggle with SS/Science. We do a ton of reading in SS/Science. I have students with reading/writing disabilities. I am talking about how doing AAP SS/Science is not realistic for grades with huge needs in reading. For example, if you have 40 percent or more of a grade reading below grade level asking them to analyze a wordy primary source from the 1700’s will be difficult. I am quite aware of twice exceptional students but my previous post was addressing large populations of kids who struggle to read.

How would you help a severely dyslexic and dysgraphia student access the primary source document from 1700 so they might analyze it? You would do the same thing for the students in the classroom with 50 or more below grade level in reading.

There are accommodations for kids with dyslexia and dysgraphia so that they can access the material. Those same accommodations are not appropriate for kids who are behind for reasons other then LDs. The kids who are below grade level need to be in a class that allows them to get up to grade level with their reading. That means a class that is probably smaller in size and has a reading specialist pushing in to work with the Teacher so that the kids can get to where they should be. Providing those kids accommodations for kids with LDs hampers the kids who are behind because they do not get to the skill level that they need to be at and could be at.

And some kids won't be able to access the material even with the accommodations because they are not behind in just reading but also comprehension. So being able to listen to the material or having the material presented in a different way might not mean that they have the necessary reading comprehension to understand the material while a kid who has a issue with processing writing may not have a comprehension issue.

Kids whose parents were reading to them since they were toddlers will have heard more words, heard more sounds, and will probably have had parents who were providing explanations that allowed them to develop comprehension skills that a child whose parents didn't read to them as a baby/toddler. Expecting that kids who are starting school without those same experiences to catch up and be able to access the same material as kids whose parents were reading to them at a young age is unrealistic. And it isn't just the starting point. Parents who read to their kids as toddlers are probably still reading to their kids in K and 1rst grade. They probably have books in the house for a kid to look at and ask questions about. A kid whose parents didn't read to them at home as a toddler is probably not reading to them in K and 1rst and they are less likely to have books at home for the kid to pick up and look at.

If there is a lack of academic support at home that reinforces what the kids are learning at school then all the accommodations that might help a kid with learning issues succeed are not likely to help a kid who is behind because they don't have the rest of the kid with learning issue but other supports at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

I'm so tired of you and your reading group story in every. single. thread about this.

I’m not pp but also saw the reality that higher reading groups met VERY infrequently with the teacher. This reality is a big part of why many parents support AAP - because we saw what happened in K-2 re: differentiation and how it worked.

If your kid can read above grade level, why does he need reading groups so frequently?

Kids attend school in order to learn and grow. Society as a whole benefits when kids are challenged to be their best at school. A kid who is ahead should be in a class where they can learn and grow and be challenged. A child who is ahead should be meeting with the Teacher regularly so that the child continues to learn and grow. They should not be ignored because they are ahead but they should be encouraged to continue to learn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

I'm so tired of you and your reading group story in every. single. thread about this.

I’m not pp but also saw the reality that higher reading groups met VERY infrequently with the teacher. This reality is a big part of why many parents support AAP - because we saw what happened in K-2 re: differentiation and how it worked.

If your kid can read above grade level, why does he need reading groups so frequently?

Kids attend school in order to learn and grow. Society as a whole benefits when kids are challenged to be their best at school. A kid who is ahead should be in a class where they can learn and grow and be challenged. A child who is ahead should be meeting with the Teacher regularly so that the child continues to learn and grow. They should not be ignored because they are ahead but they should be encouraged to continue to learn.

There are kids at every level. Cleaving off those who are the most ahead just means that those slightly ahead or on grade level get lumped in with the slowest kids and get ignored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

I'm so tired of you and your reading group story in every. single. thread about this.

I’m not pp but also saw the reality that higher reading groups met VERY infrequently with the teacher. This reality is a big part of why many parents support AAP - because we saw what happened in K-2 re: differentiation and how it worked.

If your kid can read above grade level, why does he need reading groups so frequently?

Kids attend school in order to learn and grow. Society as a whole benefits when kids are challenged to be their best at school. A kid who is ahead should be in a class where they can learn and grow and be challenged. A child who is ahead should be meeting with the Teacher regularly so that the child continues to learn and grow. They should not be ignored because they are ahead but they should be encouraged to continue to learn.

There are kids at every level. Cleaving off those who are the most ahead just means that those slightly ahead or on grade level get lumped in with the slowest kids and get ignored.

I agree that this is a huge problem with the AAP/gen ed divide. The solution isn't to return AAP kids to the gen ed classroom and then have even more kids for the teacher to ignore. It should be to restructure everything so no kid is ignored and all kids are being taught at the appropriate level. At the classroom level, all reading groups should get equal time with the classroom teacher. The kids who are behind should get additional time with the reading specialist or ESOL teacher. The kids who are ahead should get a LIII pull out, which in turn frees up the classroom teacher to spend more time with the on and below grade level kids.

In my kid's classroom, the kids who were below grade level got 30 minutes of small group instruction each day with the classroom teacher, and another 30 minutes each day with the reading specialist. My kid got 15 minutes twice per month. After several years of this, the below grade level readers were all still below grade level. Dedicating more of the teacher's time isn't working.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

Not necessarily. Reading is not highly correlated to intelligence. My DC has very severe dyslexia and has always read below grade level, despite years and years of intervention. They received appropriate accommodations so that they could access the material. Their accommodations included electronic textbooks, a reader and scribe for assessments, Kurzweil …. They have an aptitude for math and science. They took AAP for math and science. They went on to major in math and biology in college and are now in a PhD program in math theory.

Do not penalize students because they have a reading disability.

I am PP who is an AAP teacher. Not penalizing students just stating that kids who struggle with reading may struggle with SS/Science. We do a ton of reading in SS/Science. I have students with reading/writing disabilities. I am talking about how doing AAP SS/Science is not realistic for grades with huge needs in reading. For example, if you have 40 percent or more of a grade reading below grade level asking them to analyze a wordy primary source from the 1700’s will be difficult. I am quite aware of twice exceptional students but my previous post was addressing large populations of kids who struggle to read.

How would you help a severely dyslexic and dysgraphia student access the primary source document from 1700 so they might analyze it? You would do the same thing for the students in the classroom with 50 or more below grade level in reading.

There are accommodations for kids with dyslexia and dysgraphia so that they can access the material. Those same accommodations are not appropriate for kids who are behind for reasons other then LDs. The kids who are below grade level need to be in a class that allows them to get up to grade level with their reading. That means a class that is probably smaller in size and has a reading specialist pushing in to work with the Teacher so that the kids can get to where they should be. Providing those kids accommodations for kids with LDs hampers the kids who are behind because they do not get to the skill level that they need to be at and could be at.

And some kids won't be able to access the material even with the accommodations because they are not behind in just reading but also comprehension. So being able to listen to the material or having the material presented in a different way might not mean that they have the necessary reading comprehension to understand the material while a kid who has a issue with processing writing may not have a comprehension issue.

Kids whose parents were reading to them since they were toddlers will have heard more words, heard more sounds, and will probably have had parents who were providing explanations that allowed them to develop comprehension skills that a child whose parents didn't read to them as a baby/toddler. Expecting that kids who are starting school without those same experiences to catch up and be able to access the same material as kids whose parents were reading to them at a young age is unrealistic. And it isn't just the starting point. Parents who read to their kids as toddlers are probably still reading to their kids in K and 1rst grade. They probably have books in the house for a kid to look at and ask questions about. A kid whose parents didn't read to them at home as a toddler is probably not reading to them in K and 1rst and they are less likely to have books at home for the kid to pick up and look at.

If there is a lack of academic support at home that reinforces what the kids are learning at school then all the accommodations that might help a kid with learning issues succeed are not likely to help a kid who is behind because they don't have the rest of the kid with learning issue but other supports at home.

This. My AAP students with reading issues have decoding issues but not comprehension issues. We are talking about kids with comprehension and decoding issues. Some may be SPED, many are ESOL. Some maybe GenEd. There are many kids who are not ready for certain things at that is ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

I'm so tired of you and your reading group story in every. single. thread about this.

I’m not pp but also saw the reality that higher reading groups met VERY infrequently with the teacher. This reality is a big part of why many parents support AAP - because we saw what happened in K-2 re: differentiation and how it worked.

If your kid can read above grade level, why does he need reading groups so frequently?

Kids attend school in order to learn and grow. Society as a whole benefits when kids are challenged to be their best at school. A kid who is ahead should be in a class where they can learn and grow and be challenged. A child who is ahead should be meeting with the Teacher regularly so that the child continues to learn and grow. They should not be ignored because they are ahead but they should be encouraged to continue to learn.

There are kids at every level. Cleaving off those who are the most ahead just means that those slightly ahead or on grade level get lumped in with the slowest kids and get ignored.

That is only because we are doing our best to track kids. There are historical reasons for disliking tracking, tracking used to mean that the kids in the lower classes were simply ignored and treated as if they had no chance to graduate from high school. They dumped kids with learning issues, emotional issues, and behavior problems in the remedial classes and did little to actually help the kids catch up.

Tracking would work if we allowed the classes for kids who are behind to be smaller and have the support that Teachers need, like reading and math specialists, so that the kids get more attention and have a chance to learn the material and catch up to grade level. I suspect that this doesn't happen because parents of kids who are on grade level or ahead will complain that their classes are larger and that is not fair to their kids, kind of like some parents complain about smaller classes at Title 1 schools vs non-title 1 schools.

I also suspect that we will not allow tracking because it will end up clearly demonstrating the known education gap between Black and Hispanic kids and Asian and White kids. Then people will scream about segregation because the lower track classes will be mainly Black and Hispanic kids.

So instead of doing what would make sense, we stick to these larger, mixed ability classes that don't serve the kids who are behind or the kids on grade level or the kids who are ahead. And when we do have a program for kids who are far enough ahead, like AAP, parents complain about segregation and/or how unfair it is. The only reason it looks this way is because we are unwilling to do what is fair for everyone, tracking, because it appears to be segregating kids instead of accepting that it is a solution to solving the education gap by providing more intensive support for the kids who are behind while providing a classroom that supports kids who are on grade level and kids who are ahead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

I'm so tired of you and your reading group story in every. single. thread about this.

I am glad she told the reading group story.

I do think they should put the lowest performers in the same class.