Is FCPS getting rid of AAP?

[Anonymous]

Perhaps kids should be held back in K/1st. I don't know why this doesn't happen anymore.

[Anonymous]

The answer is year round school and extended opening times.

The reason why White and Asians are ahead of Black and Hispanic kids is that they use the huge gaps in the school schedule ( evenings, weekends and vacations) to supplement to get ahead. Black and Hispanic kids aren’t innately dummer or less self motivated. However, if they spend every evening sweeping up the family store or babysitting siblings until their parents get home from a late shift while a white/Asian classmate is at Kumon then they will fall behind them academically.

Children shouldn’t be judged of their parents dedication to outside enrichment but that’s what our system dose. The equity gap will be closed by closing that time gap.

[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 am glad she told the reading group story.

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

Wait, what? No #equity there! FCPS isn't going to risk losing the high-performers to private, sorry not sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The answer is year round school and extended opening times.

The reason why White and Asians are ahead of Black and Hispanic kids is that they use the huge gaps in the school schedule ( evenings, weekends and vacations) to supplement to get ahead. Black and Hispanic kids aren’t innately dummer or less self motivated. However, if they spend every evening sweeping up the family store or babysitting siblings until their parents get home from a late shift while a white/Asian classmate is at Kumon then they will fall behind them academically.

Children shouldn’t be judged of their parents dedication to outside enrichment but that’s what our system dose. The equity gap will be closed by closing that time gap.

You're starting to wrap your arms around the issue but you're still off base. Babysitting and Kumon are not the difference between school experiences among different groups. Keep looking.

[Anonymous]

Ok, let’s say I set a college level book about Muhammad Ali to a class of 14 year old, predominantly African - American, kids at a Title 1 high school as a challenge. The Vietnam war is the broad unit topic. Ali is very likely a hero to most of those kids parents and they will encourage their kids to read at home as well as engage in conversation around the home and during social events with other invested adults.

Am I getting closer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The answer is year round school and extended opening times.

The reason why White and Asians are ahead of Black and Hispanic kids is that they use the huge gaps in the school schedule ( evenings, weekends and vacations) to supplement to get ahead. Black and Hispanic kids aren’t innately dummer or less self motivated. However, if they spend every evening sweeping up the family store or babysitting siblings until their parents get home from a late shift while a white/Asian classmate is at Kumon then they will fall behind them academically.

Children shouldn’t be judged of their parents dedication to outside enrichment but that’s what our system dose. The equity gap will be closed by closing that time gap.

THIS 1000%!! I am a Black mom and have signed my kindergartener up for tutoring 4 hours per week because he is barely on-grade reading level. He was evaluated (fee), we've paid for 5 months of tutoring in full (more than what people make in a month) and we still have to drive him there and wait (time/gas).

As I weighed the pros and cons of sending him to a reading tutor, I thought about other kids that could use a bit of nudge to start on the path of reading but don't have parents that are able to make the time and financial commitment.
Black and brown children to lower income households can absolutely excel if the cost of supplemental education wasn't so expensive. Same with sports, housing, etc. The gaps between us are rapidly dividing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps kids should be held back in K/1st. I don't know why this doesn't happen anymore.

It's tricky. Most of the kids who are years below grade level fall into one of these categories:
1. ESOL
2. Improperly supported or undiagnosed learning disability
3. They're simply not interested in learning.

Holding kids back would do nothing to fix the kids in the first two categories, but it might do a lot of good for the 3rd group. The fear of being held back could motivate some kids to at least put in a modicum of effort. It would be more productive, though, to try to fix the first two issues. Kids who are at beginning ESOL levels might be fine in K-1st. By 3rd, if they're not at a certain proficiency level, they're not going to get much out of mainstreaming plus some ESOL pull outs. They'd be better served in a dedicated ESOL program. Likewise, undiagnosed or unsupported dyslexia is not going to be fixed by having teachers just funnel more time into kids who are behind while still using ineffective curricula.

[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.

You can increase the number of students in your prospective classes because "learning styles", like quite a few other trendy practices in the education industry, is evidence-free. See this, for example:

https://www.worklearning.com/2020/02/24/jane-bozarth-pledges-1000-to-the-learning-styles-challenge/

Prize has been around for sixteen years, and nobody has claimed it.

Tracking is useful, but also highly disfavored; AAP, self-contained classrooms, and geographic sorting by socioeconomic status are the kludges used to implement it.

[Anonymous]

As adults we know our own strengths and weaknesses. I am terrible at public speaking but am very organised and often complete work before deadlines. I have colleagues who are the opposite so we are balanced as a team. It’s illogical that the same wouldn’t apply to kids. Given a topic, the super shy kid with a wild imagination might prefer to write a story where as another one who could talk for days chooses to perform a skit with friends. That’s what the concept of different learning styles means.