AAP - A new perspective

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To raise the standard of public school education in the U.S., which is quite desparately needed, and to better prepare students for STEM or any other career path, it seems to me that the AAP curriculum should be the norm, and not an exception to the Gen Ed curriculum. Instead of using the NNAT, CoGat and the myriad alphabet-soup test scores to select students for the AAP, the schools should instead pull out students with low (say 1 standard deviation below the mean) scores for remedial or what's currently considered Gen Ed curriculum. I think most children would thrive well in and actually enjoy a challenging AAP curriculum and learn more in such a system. Frankly, most students feel bored and unchallenged in the current Gen Ed curriculum, and some wander off into other pursuits as a result. The proposed system will save parents (and, implicitly, their children) the tremendous agony and desperation that is evident in posts in the AAP forum, and the über and über testing (WISC, SB, ...) to supersede the scores in the previous tests.

I agree. AAP has long outlived its original purpose.

no it is same; just tons of Indians and Asians moved into the area so naturally the numbers of students and demand for such services went way up. These people [b]were not here 15-20 years ago.

Really?? You scare me. You're also wrong. If you look at the statistics you will note that the majority of the increase is not due to these ethnic groups.

of course it is. They weren't even here in significant numbers 15-20 years ago and now they dominate AAP.

[Anonymous]

This is not in any way, shape, or form, a "new perspective."

It's been articulated in this very forum (or the schools forum before AAP was created as a separate thread) many times before. You should search for some of the previous discussions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This is not in any way, shape, or form, a "new perspective."

It's been articulated in this very forum (or the schools forum before AAP was created as a separate thread) many times before. You should search for some of the previous discussions.

someone noted there used to be many fewer students in AAP and it was just the top few percent. That was before the Indian and Asians moved here in large numbers. They are very academically motivated and the fact that 17% of FCPS is "academically advanced" is hardly surprising given this influx.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To raise the standard of public school education in the U.S., which is quite desparately needed, and to better prepare students for STEM or any other career path, it seems to me that the AAP curriculum should be the norm, and not an exception to the Gen Ed curriculum. Instead of using the NNAT, CoGat and the myriad alphabet-soup test scores to select students for the AAP, the schools should instead pull out students with low (say 1 standard deviation below the mean) scores for remedial or what's currently considered Gen Ed curriculum. I think most children would thrive well in and actually enjoy a challenging AAP curriculum and learn more in such a system. Frankly, most students feel bored and unchallenged in the current Gen Ed curriculum, and some wander off into other pursuits as a result. The proposed system will save parents (and, implicitly, their children) the tremendous agony and desperation that is evident in posts in the AAP forum, and the über and über testing (WISC, SB, ...) to supersede the scores in the previous tests.

what is with this constant discussion of AAP curriculum? Except math perhaps, the curriculum is about the same. The difference is the kids themselves which allows more thoughtful discussion and the classes can move ahead faster. Even if everyone was in AAP, you'd soon see a sorting out with some moving ahead and some falling well behind. Then you'd be right back to the need to serve the academically advanced who are capable of moving ahead faster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To raise the standard of public school education in the U.S., which is quite desparately needed, and to better prepare students for STEM or any other career path, it seems to me that the AAP curriculum should be the norm, and not an exception to the Gen Ed curriculum. Instead of using the NNAT, CoGat and the myriad alphabet-soup test scores to select students for the AAP, the schools should instead pull out students with low (say 1 standard deviation below the mean) scores for remedial or what's currently considered Gen Ed curriculum. I think most children would thrive well in and actually enjoy a challenging AAP curriculum and learn more in such a system. Frankly, most students feel bored and unchallenged in the current Gen Ed curriculum, and some wander off into other pursuits as a result. The proposed system will save parents (and, implicitly, their children) the tremendous agony and desperation that is evident in posts in the AAP forum, and the über and über testing (WISC, SB, ...) to supersede the scores in the previous tests.

what is with this constant discussion of AAP curriculum? Except math perhaps, the curriculum is about the same. The difference is the kids themselves which allows more thoughtful discussion and the classes can move ahead faster. Even if everyone was in AAP, you'd soon see a sorting out with some moving ahead and some falling well behind. Then you'd be right back to the need to serve the academically advanced who are capable of moving ahead faster.

Very good point 2nd poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To raise the standard of public school education in the U.S., which is quite desparately needed, and to better prepare students for STEM or any other career path, it seems to me that the AAP curriculum should be the norm, and not an exception to the Gen Ed curriculum. Instead of using the NNAT, CoGat and the myriad alphabet-soup test scores to select students for the AAP, the schools should instead pull out students with low (say 1 standard deviation below the mean) scores for remedial or what's currently considered Gen Ed curriculum. I think most children would thrive well in and actually enjoy a challenging AAP curriculum and learn more in such a system. Frankly, most students feel bored and unchallenged in the current Gen Ed curriculum, and some wander off into other pursuits as a result. The proposed system will save parents (and, implicitly, their children) the tremendous agony and desperation that is evident in posts in the AAP forum, and the über and über testing (WISC, SB, ...) to supersede the scores in the previous tests.

what is with this constant discussion of AAP curriculum? Except math perhaps, the curriculum is about the same. The difference is the kids themselves which allows more thoughtful discussion and the classes can move ahead faster. Even if everyone was in AAP, you'd soon see a sorting out with some moving ahead and some falling well behind. Then you'd be right back to the need to serve the academically advanced who are capable of moving ahead faster.

Very good point 2nd poster.

Is the curriculum the same though? Do they read the same books in GE and AAP? Do they both do presentations and have socratic seminars? Do all the children use the William and Mary materials? I'm sincerely asking. One of my children may not get into AAP and I'm wondering how the curriculum differs and whether or not GE kids can handle the AAP curriculum at a slower pace. The OP said all children should be given the AAP curriculum. I'm wondering if they do this now at a slower pace or if it's an entirely different focus in general ed. Most of the posters here can't seem to stay on the topic. They write about how great it is for GE and AAP to be separate and how each child's needs are met, but they really aren't talking about whether or not the general ed kids can handle the AAP curriculum which is what the OP suggested.

[Anonymous]

The conversation OP started is really be about the general ed curriculum and how to improve it. OP, maybe this is the wrong forum for it since you're asking AAP parents how to improve general ed yet they might not be familiar with general ed today and are mainly concerned about the AAP program for gifted learners only.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The conversation OP started is really be about the general ed curriculum and how to improve it. OP, maybe this is the wrong forum for it since you're asking AAP parents how to improve general ed yet they might not be familiar with general ed today and are mainly concerned about the AAP program for gifted learners only.

Lots of parents with a kid in AAP have kids in Gen. Ed. as well, FYI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is not in any way, shape, or form, a "new perspective."

It's been articulated in this very forum (or the schools forum before AAP was created as a separate thread) many times before. You should search for some of the previous discussions.

someone noted there used to be many fewer students in AAP and it was just the top few percent. That was before the Indian and Asians moved here in large numbers. They are very academically motivated and the fact that 17% of FCPS is "academically advanced" is hardly surprising given this influx.

I disagree that the current bloated AAP program is due to an influx of Indians/Asians. It's simply due to a lowering of admittance standards which FCPS thought would be a good idea but turned out to be one of their worst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To raise the standard of public school education in the U.S., which is quite desparately needed, and to better prepare students for STEM or any other career path, it seems to me that the AAP curriculum should be the norm, and not an exception to the Gen Ed curriculum. Instead of using the NNAT, CoGat and the myriad alphabet-soup test scores to select students for the AAP, the schools should instead pull out students with low (say 1 standard deviation below the mean) scores for remedial or what's currently considered Gen Ed curriculum. I think most children would thrive well in and actually enjoy a challenging AAP curriculum and learn more in such a system. Frankly, most students feel bored and unchallenged in the current Gen Ed curriculum, and some wander off into other pursuits as a result. The proposed system will save parents (and, implicitly, their children) the tremendous agony and desperation that is evident in posts in the AAP forum, and the über and über testing (WISC, SB, ...) to supersede the scores in the previous tests.

what is with this constant discussion of AAP curriculum? Except math perhaps, the curriculum is about the same. The difference is the kids themselves which allows more thoughtful discussion and the classes can move ahead faster. Even if everyone was in AAP, you'd soon see a sorting out with some moving ahead and some falling well behind. Then you'd be right back to the need to serve the academically advanced who are capable of moving ahead faster.

Very good point 2nd poster.

Is the curriculum the same though? Do they read the same books in GE and AAP? Do they both do presentations and have socratic seminars? Do all the children use the William and Mary materials? I'm sincerely asking. One of my children may not get into AAP and I'm wondering how the curriculum differs and whether or not GE kids can handle the AAP curriculum at a slower pace. The OP said all children should be given the AAP curriculum. I'm wondering if they do this now at a slower pace or if it's an entirely different focus in general ed. Most of the posters here can't seem to stay on the topic. They write about how great it is for GE and AAP to be separate and how each child's needs are met, but they really aren't talking about whether or not the general ed kids can handle the AAP curriculum which is what the OP suggested.

The principal of our center school told us that every child in that school could do the AAP curriculum. It's not rocket science, it's the same information the GE classes get. The pace may be quicker, especially with math, but otherwise, it's nothing out of the ordinary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To raise the standard of public school education in the U.S., which is quite desparately needed, and to better prepare students for STEM or any other career path, it seems to me that the AAP curriculum should be the norm, and not an exception to the Gen Ed curriculum. Instead of using the NNAT, CoGat and the myriad alphabet-soup test scores to select students for the AAP, the schools should instead pull out students with low (say 1 standard deviation below the mean) scores for remedial or what's currently considered Gen Ed curriculum. I think most children would thrive well in and actually enjoy a challenging AAP curriculum and learn more in such a system. Frankly, most students feel bored and unchallenged in the current Gen Ed curriculum, and some wander off into other pursuits as a result. The proposed system will save parents (and, implicitly, their children) the tremendous agony and desperation that is evident in posts in the AAP forum, and the über and über testing (WISC, SB, ...) to supersede the scores in the previous tests.

what is with this constant discussion of AAP curriculum? Except math perhaps, the curriculum is about the same. The difference is the kids themselves which allows more thoughtful discussion and the classes can move ahead faster. Even if everyone was in AAP, you'd soon see a sorting out with some moving ahead and some falling well behind. Then you'd be right back to the need to serve the academically advanced who are capable of moving ahead faster.

Very good point 2nd poster.

Is the curriculum the same though? Do they read the same books in GE and AAP? Do they both do presentations and have socratic seminars? Do all the children use the William and Mary materials? I'm sincerely asking. One of my children may not get into AAP and I'm wondering how the curriculum differs and whether or not GE kids can handle the AAP curriculum at a slower pace. The OP said all children should be given the AAP curriculum. I'm wondering if they do this now at a slower pace or if it's an entirely different focus in general ed. Most of the posters here can't seem to stay on the topic. They write about how great it is for GE and AAP to be separate and how each child's needs are met, but they really aren't talking about whether or not the general ed kids can handle the AAP curriculum which is what the OP suggested.

The principal of our center school told us that every child in that school could do the AAP curriculum. It's not rocket science, it's the same information the GE classes get. The pace may be quicker, especially with math, but otherwise, it's nothing out of the ordinary.

the pace, the depth, the quality of the discussion ...

[Anonymous]

I posted a few times earlier.

Both our center and base school offer Socratic seminar. I think your kids have far better odds of being selected to participate at the base school over the center school.
Both offer advanced math, with fifth graders taking the sixth grade SOL etc, but only the center busses kids to the middle school for honors algebra 7.

I don't know about Caesars English, William and Mary, etc.

The center school has far better extracurriculars like Odyssey of the Mind, Science Olympiad, fencing, robotics, an upper grade musical, etc.

You can do a lot more with a school of 900 than a school of 600.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I posted a few times earlier.

Both our center and base school offer Socratic seminar. I think your kids have far better odds of being selected to participate at the base school over the center school.
Both offer advanced math, with fifth graders taking the sixth grade SOL etc, but only the center busses kids to the middle school for honors algebra 7.

I don't know about Caesars English, William and Mary, etc.

The center school has far better extracurriculars like Odyssey of the Mind, Science Olympiad, fencing, robotics, an upper grade musical, etc.
[u]
You can do a lot more with a school of 900 than a school of 600.

Most of those are PTA organized. If parents want them and want to do the advertising, work to secure the room reservation, get the fingerprinting done of the instructors, etc., you could have them at any school. They are a PITA to get these programs implemented but I'm certain a school of 600 could have them just like a school of 900 could have them IF a parent steps up to get them organized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted a few times earlier.

Both our center and base school offer Socratic seminar. I think your kids have far better odds of being selected to participate at the base school over the center school.
Both offer advanced math, with fifth graders taking the sixth grade SOL etc, but only the center busses kids to the middle school for honors algebra 7.

I don't know about Caesars English, William and Mary, etc.

The center school has far better extracurriculars like Odyssey of the Mind, Science Olympiad, fencing, robotics, an upper grade musical, etc.
[u]
You can do a lot more with a school of 900 than a school of 600.

Most of those are PTA organized. If parents want them and want to do the advertising, work to secure the room reservation, get the fingerprinting done of the instructors, etc., you could have them at any school. They are a PITA to get these programs implemented but I'm certain a school of 600 could have them just like a school of 900 could have them IF a parent steps up to get them organized.

And I think this is one of those big disparities (and generalizations) of AAP vs GE. The AAP parents are the ones at our school who have driven all the academic afterschool programs like Odyssey of the Mind. It is not beyond any school to have these programs but the parents who insist on making these programs happen at their child's school are often the ones who have an overwhelming home emphasis on accelerated academics. These are often AAP parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted a few times earlier.

Both our center and base school offer Socratic seminar. I think your kids have far better odds of being selected to participate at the base school over the center school.
Both offer advanced math, with fifth graders taking the sixth grade SOL etc, but only the center busses kids to the middle school for honors algebra 7.

I don't know about Caesars English, William and Mary, etc.

The center school has far better extracurriculars like Odyssey of the Mind, Science Olympiad, fencing, robotics, an upper grade musical, etc.
[u]
You can do a lot more with a school of 900 than a school of 600.

Most of those are PTA organized. If parents want them and want to do the advertising, work to secure the room reservation, get the fingerprinting done of the instructors, etc., you could have them at any school. They are a PITA to get these programs implemented but I'm certain a school of 600 could have them just like a school of 900 could have them IF a parent steps up to get them organized.

Actually it's quite difficult. My DC is at a 600 student elementary and programs get cut all the time because of lack of interest. A lot of children do their own thing and don't want to participate in PTA run activities. With a larger cohort, the PTA can provide additional clubs that will be filled on a continual basis and not just run the one year someone steps up to start the program.