Anyone's child not able to stay in AP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do believe if standards were changed (I'm not going to say "raised" because that suggests a level to which students should aspire) the AAP program could better identify those who have different learning styles and needs. As pp said, good test-takers are getting placed and then struggling. My DC had a few children drop out the first half of the year back in 3rd grade AAP because it was not a good fit.

Raising the bar to 140 won't help to figure out who the profoundly gifted kids are. There are too many kids who have seen sample tests prior to taking the tests that are supposed to test giftedness, and there are others what haven't seen those tests and so the results aren't necessarily a true reflection of who really is profoundly gifted. I really would like to see a study that tracks the academic performance through the years of kids who score well on these tests in K-2. I'm curious how they do in high school relative to other kids. I know a lot of people are against tracking at a young age, but I think having regular and honors classes starting in first grade would be good. I think honors classes allows for a more fluid system where kids who aren't in honors in first grade can be in honors in second grade if they get better at a subject. It also would allow kids to be in honors in some subjects and not others. Also, switching from an honors class to regular from one year to the next creates less of a stigma that switching from AAP back to Gen Ed. I know honors in elementary is a nonstarter, but it really is a more fair system.

That is what LLIV does at our DCs' old ES. They also do that starting in 2nd grade math. For each section all the kids take a pretest and then they are divided up by that result until the next section. My youngest was in the LLIV for math and science but not for English and social studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do believe if standards were changed (I'm not going to say "raised" because that suggests a level to which students should aspire) the AAP program could better identify those who have different learning styles and needs. As pp said, good test-takers are getting placed and then struggling. My DC had a few children drop out the first half of the year back in 3rd grade AAP because it was not a good fit.

Raising the bar to 140 won't help to figure out who the profoundly gifted kids are. There are too many kids who have seen sample tests prior to taking the tests that are supposed to test giftedness, and there are others what haven't seen those tests and so the results aren't necessarily a true reflection of who really is profoundly gifted. I really would like to see a study that tracks the academic performance through the years of kids who score well on these tests in K-2. I'm curious how they do in high school relative to other kids. I know a lot of people are against tracking at a young age, but I think having regular and honors classes starting in first grade would be good. I think honors classes allows for a more fluid system where kids who aren't in honors in first grade can be in honors in second grade if they get better at a subject. It also would allow kids to be in honors in some subjects and not others. Also, switching from an honors class to regular from one year to the next creates less of a stigma that switching from AAP back to Gen Ed. I know honors in elementary is a nonstarter, but it really is a more fair system.

That is what LLIV does at our DCs' old ES. They also do that starting in 2nd grade math. For each section all the kids take a pretest and then they are divided up by that result until the next section. My youngest was in the LLIV for math and science but not for English and social studies.

If the child is getting advanced education in only certain subjects, then by definition, it is not level IV. Your child may have been placed with the LLIV classes for certain classes, but was not getting Level IV services.