Why do schools not let mingle gen-ed kids with AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would the AAP kids mix and mingle with the non-AAP kids? Is there something about the non-AAP kids that they want to/need to be introduced to the AAP kids?

The non-AAP kids have their classes/classmates and the AAP kids have their classmates/teachers?

What would be the point of mixing these groups? My kid's school operates like two sub-schools. Neither is inherently superior or inferior -- they are just separate when it comes to their schedules. Of course, they share a unified loyalty/pride in their school, but they seem very separate. (That impression may also be influenced by the fact that my kid is in a trailer as are all the AAP kids in DC's grade level. So, they aren't really IN the school building physically... and it has that effect mentally --
"separate")

You got to be kidding , a troll.

[Anonymous]

So many obnoxious things re AAP Centers.

[Anonymous]

I also don't understand the ",missed opportunities" of friendship. In that dopey scenario aren't 4th graders missing out on friendships with 3rd and 5th graders because they aren't in the same classes? Aren't kids who live in the same large neighborhood but are split between School A and School B missing out on
friendships?

A child doesn't need to be exposed to 150 kids to make friends. In some small schools there may only be two classes in the grade. Are those kids suffering because there aren't another 50-75 peers at the school?

It really is looking for a problem where there shouldn't be one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I also don't understand the ",missed opportunities" of friendship. In that dopey scenario aren't 4th graders missing out on friendships with 3rd and 5th graders because they aren't in the same classes? Aren't kids who live in the same large neighborhood but are split between School A and School B missing out on
friendships?

A child doesn't need to be exposed to 150 kids to make friends. In some small schools there may only be two classes in the grade. Are those kids suffering because there aren't another 50-75 peers at the school?

It really is looking for a problem where there shouldn't be one.

I think the problem is that there's an academic segregation going on at the center schools. So that the GE kids never get to hang out with the academic superstars and the academic superstars never hang out with kids who may be on grade level or even struggling. This makes for a very segregated way of living and was the reason tracking went away in the first place. I think many people are supportive of kids getting lessons at their academic level. What they aren't supportive of is situation in elementary where kids are only with like minded kids whether that's race, intelligence, or parent income level. In high school it makes more sense to specialize because children are figuring out what they want to major in. Can you not understand how a kid who is in GE might think he's too dumb to even hang out with the AAP kids if they are so segregated or an AAP kid thinking the other kids are so dumb they aren't worth hanging out with? That type of attitude stays with people throughout their lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also don't understand the ",missed opportunities" of friendship. In that dopey scenario aren't 4th graders missing out on friendships with 3rd and 5th graders because they aren't in the same classes? Aren't kids who live in the same large neighborhood but are split between School A and School B missing out on
friendships?

A child doesn't need to be exposed to 150 kids to make friends. In some small schools there may only be two classes in the grade. Are those kids suffering because there aren't another 50-75 peers at the school?

It really is looking for a problem where there shouldn't be one.

I think the problem is that there's an academic segregation going on at the center schools. So that the GE kids never get to hang out with the academic superstars and the academic superstars never hang out with kids who may be on grade level or even struggling. This makes for a very segregated way of living and was the reason tracking went away in the first place. I think many people are supportive of kids getting lessons at their academic level. What they aren't supportive of is situation in elementary where kids are only with like minded kids whether that's race, intelligence, or parent income level. In high school it makes more sense to specialize because children are figuring out what they want to major in. Can you not understand how a kid who is in GE might think he's too dumb to even hang out with the AAP kids if they are so segregated or an AAP kid thinking the other kids are so dumb they aren't worth hanging out with? That type of attitude stays with people throughout their lives.

You just hit the nail on the head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also don't understand the ",missed opportunities" of friendship. In that dopey scenario aren't 4th graders missing out on friendships with 3rd and 5th graders because they aren't in the same classes? Aren't kids who live in the same large neighborhood but are split between School A and School B missing out on
friendships?

A child doesn't need to be exposed to 150 kids to make friends. In some small schools there may only be two classes in the grade. Are those kids suffering because there aren't another 50-75 peers at the school?

It really is looking for a problem where there shouldn't be one.

I think the problem is that there's an academic segregation going on at the center schools. So that the GE kids never get to hang out with the academic superstars and the academic superstars never hang out with kids who may be on grade level or even struggling. This makes for a very segregated way of living and was the reason tracking went away in the first place. I think many people are supportive of kids getting lessons at their academic level. What they aren't supportive of is situation in elementary where kids are only with like minded kids whether that's race, intelligence, or parent income level. In high school it makes more sense to specialize because children are figuring out what they want to major in. Can you not understand how a kid who is in GE might think he's too dumb to even hang out with the AAP kids if they are so segregated or an AAP kid thinking the other kids are so dumb they aren't worth hanging out with? That type of attitude stays with people throughout their lives.

Well, then the school needs to mix specials. And have recess at the same time with each grade. The parents need to sign the kids up for sports and they will make friends with kids with similar interests.

In the end, the kids are going to play with the kids they want to play with. My kid never played with the jock kids (a fair number of AAP kids but mostly non AAP kids).My kid stunk atsports, didn't want to play them and was not in high demand by the jocks, including his best friend. At any free play opportunity, he hung with the geeky kids doing geeky games. That group was mostly AAP kids with some non AAP kids. They found their mother ship .

My jockier kid plays with the jocks. That group is a mix of all kinds of kids. Those kids found their team, so to speak.

These kids would have ended up with the same general group of playmates whether their core subjects were segregated or not, as would most of the kids in the school.

Maybe it is different for girls, but this is my experience with boys. They will find their natural frind group at recess, regardless of their homeroom for math, science, english and social studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also don't understand the ",missed opportunities" of friendship. In that dopey scenario aren't 4th graders missing out on friendships with 3rd and 5th graders because they aren't in the same classes? Aren't kids who live in the same large neighborhood but are split between School A and School B missing out on
friendships?

A child doesn't need to be exposed to 150 kids to make friends. In some small schools there may only be two classes in the grade. Are those kids suffering because there aren't another 50-75 peers at the school?

It really is looking for a problem where there shouldn't be one.

I think the problem is that there's an academic segregation going on at the center schools. So that the GE kids never get to hang out with the academic superstars and the academic superstars never hang out with kids who may be on grade level or even struggling. This makes for a very segregated way of living and was the reason tracking went away in the first place. I think many people are supportive of kids getting lessons at their academic level. What they aren't supportive of is situation in elementary where kids are only with like minded kids whether that's race, intelligence, or parent income level. In high school it makes more sense to specialize because children are figuring out what they want to major in. Can you not understand how a kid who is in GE might think he's too dumb to even hang out with the AAP kids if they are so segregated or an AAP kid thinking the other kids are so dumb they aren't worth hanging out with? That type of attitude stays with people throughout their lives.

Well, then the school needs to mix specials. And have recess at the same time with each grade. The parents need to sign the kids up for sports and they will make friends with kids with similar interests.

In the end, the kids are going to play with the kids they want to play with. My kid never played with the jock kids (a fair number of AAP kids but mostly non AAP kids).My kid stunk atsports, didn't want to play them and was not in high demand by the jocks, including his best friend. At any free play opportunity, he hung with the geeky kids doing geeky games. That group was mostly AAP kids with some non AAP kids. They found their mother ship .

My jockier kid plays with the jocks. That group is a mix of all kinds of kids. Those kids found their team, so to speak.

These kids would have ended up with the same general group of playmates whether their core subjects were segregated or not, as would most of the kids in the school.

Maybe it is different for girls, but this is my experience with boys. They will find their natural frind group at recess, regardless of their homeroom for math, science, english and social studies.

For their best friends, yes, but I'm amazed at how integrated all the children are at our non-center school. The boys especially seem to all get along together whether they are jocks, nerds, computer, or music fans. Also, I love to hear about children helping others in need. For AAP children, there could be a lot of leadership opportunities, but they are missed by the segregation of abilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it true that for the most part your kid socializes mostly with the kids in his/her class that particular year?

Yes. But don't cloud this discussion with common sense

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school pays lip service to mixing, but the reality is all students have to sit with their class at lunch, so they can't sit with friends in other classes. On field trips, each class divides into groups from that same class, and they have to stay together, so no mingling there either (or on the bus, as kids have to sit with their classes). They are mixed in specials and I think at recess, but that's about it. It makes no sense to keep these kids separate. They're missing out on friendships they would otherwise have made if they weren't segregated into separate classrooms.

Every single elementary school in the county seats kids at lunch by class and loads the busses for field trips by class.

For the lunches it is a timing/scheduling thing based on bringing classes to the cafeteria together and collecting each class at the same time so the tables are scattered properly forcleaning and flipping for the next class of kids.

For field trips, keeping homeroom classes together is a safe and easy way not to lose kids along the way.

Those two issues would happen whether or not your school has AAP and has zero to do with keeping kids in different programs segregated.

You are creating an issue where there is none in these two specific examples.

In all schools AAP kids rotate within AAP classes and Gen-Ed kids rotate within Gen-Ed classes. So what you just said will not hold true if the kids were not segregated, as all the kids will have rotated amongst themselves.

I do understand keeping class together scenario for field trips. But I feel that still if we have 4 classes, class 1 can be with class 2,3, or 4 in same bus for different field trips. In our school always class 1 and 2 (AAP kids) are in 1 bus , and class 3 and 4 are in bus 2.

And in my non AAP kids' school teacher X and teacher Y's classes are always paired up for field trips, busses, projects, etc as are teacher A and teacher B's classes.

I think the teachers go with whatever is simplest in terms of organization and scheduling, and not for some evil grand master plan to stop interaction and friendships between kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many obnoxious things re AAP Centers.

You're the most notable one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it true that for the most part your kid socializes mostly with the kids in his/her class that particular year?

Yes. But don't cloud this discussion with common sense

It isn't common sense or necessary. For instance, my kid at another school rotates classes and gets to meet all the children in his grade. Also, he attends SACC and meets kids of all grades in the school. He walks to school with neighbors of all grades. School doesn't have to be so segregated. There are many schools even where kids of different ages are in one classroom. Think how different the one room school house was to the concept of kids being in an AAP center in AAP or general ed and only being with kids of their same grade and academic ability. I'm not advocating that we should go back to the one room schoolhouse, but there are some positives to this mixed age/ability approach that could be incorporated better in an AAP center school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it true that for the most part your kid socializes mostly with the kids in his/her class that particular year?

Yes. But don't cloud this discussion with common sense

It isn't common sense or necessary. For instance, my kid at another school rotates classes and gets to meet all the children in his grade. Also, he attends SACC and meets kids of all grades in the school. He walks to school with neighbors of all grades. School doesn't have to be so segregated. There are many schools even where kids of different ages are in one classroom. Think how different the one room school house was to the concept of kids being in an AAP center in AAP or general ed and only being with kids of their same grade and academic ability. I'm not advocating that we should go back to the one room schoolhouse, but there are some positives to this mixed age/ability approach that could be incorporated better in an AAP center school.

They do this in the center school too. In fact, my center kid mingled far more with other classes than my non center kids who only mixed classes for PE.

It sounds like your center might not be a good fit for your family and keeping your child at your base school is much more ideal based on your description of your base school.

Have you considered moving your child back to the base school so he can mingle in all of his classes and not just specials?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also don't understand the ",missed opportunities" of friendship. In that dopey scenario aren't 4th graders missing out on friendships with 3rd and 5th graders because they aren't in the same classes? Aren't kids who live in the same large neighborhood but are split between School A and School B missing out on
friendships?

A child doesn't need to be exposed to 150 kids to make friends. In some small schools there may only be two classes in the grade. Are those kids suffering because there aren't another 50-75 peers at the school?

It really is looking for a problem where there shouldn't be one.

I think the problem is that there's an academic segregation going on at the center schools. So that the GE kids never get to hang out with the academic superstars and the academic superstars never hang out with kids who may be on grade level or even struggling. This makes for a very segregated way of living and was the reason tracking went away in the first place. I think many people are supportive of kids getting lessons at their academic level. What they aren't supportive of is situation in elementary where kids are only with like minded kids whether that's race, intelligence, or parent income level. In high school it makes more sense to specialize because children are figuring out what they want to major in. Can you not understand how a kid who is in GE might think he's too dumb to even hang out with the AAP kids if they are so segregated or an AAP kid thinking the other kids are so dumb they aren't worth hanging out with? That type of attitude stays with people throughout their lives.

you're assuming or projecting that kids in each group think the AAP kids are superior and the non-AAP kids are inferior. I don't think that is happening. They just simply don't think about the other group...at all. Maybe at some schools your presumed mindset is true. It's not something I'm aware of at my kid's school... maybe b/c the parents aren't in a twist about who's in AAP and who's not. They are simply co-located. And there's nothing inherently wrong with that.... also, I take issue with your suggestion that the non-AAP classes are all "on grade level or struggling" -- there are smart, capable kids in non-AAP classes as well. You make non-AAP seem like it is second class. That's not how I see it (I also have a kid in gen. ed), that's not how my AAP kid sees it (DC doesn't think of the non-AAP kids AT ALL), and that's not how my gen. ed kid sees it (DC2 doesn't think of the AAP kids at all and doesn't desire to be an AAP kid).

I wonder if your child is a non-AAP kid in a center school and perhaps you see a heirarchy (real or perceived) that is not necessarily happening at other schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also don't understand the ",missed opportunities" of friendship. In that dopey scenario aren't 4th graders missing out on friendships with 3rd and 5th graders because they aren't in the same classes? Aren't kids who live in the same large neighborhood but are split between School A and School B missing out on
friendships?

A child doesn't need to be exposed to 150 kids to make friends. In some small schools there may only be two classes in the grade. Are those kids suffering because there aren't another 50-75 peers at the school?

It really is looking for a problem where there shouldn't be one.

I think the problem is that there's an academic segregation going on at the center schools. So that the GE kids never get to hang out with the academic superstars and the academic superstars never hang out with kids who may be on grade level or even struggling. This makes for a very segregated way of living and was the reason tracking went away in the first place. I think many people are supportive of kids getting lessons at their academic level. What they aren't supportive of is situation in elementary where kids are only with like minded kids whether that's race, intelligence, or parent income level. In high school it makes more sense to specialize because children are figuring out what they want to major in. Can you not understand how a kid who is in GE might think he's too dumb to even hang out with the AAP kids if they are so segregated or an AAP kid thinking the other kids are so dumb they aren't worth hanging out with? That type of attitude stays with people throughout their lives.

you're assuming or projecting that kids in each group think the AAP kids are superior and the non-AAP kids are inferior. I don't think that is happening. They just simply don't think about the other group...at all. Maybe at some schools your presumed mindset is true. It's not something I'm aware of at my kid's school... maybe b/c the parents aren't in a twist about who's in AAP and who's not. They are simply co-located. And there's nothing inherently wrong with that.... also, I take issue with your suggestion that the non-AAP classes are all "on grade level or struggling" -- there are smart, capable kids in non-AAP classes as well. You make non-AAP seem like it is second class. That's not how I see it (I also have a kid in gen. ed), that's not how my AAP kid sees it (DC doesn't think of the non-AAP kids AT ALL), and that's not how my gen. ed kid sees it (DC2 doesn't think of the AAP kids at all and doesn't desire to be an AAP kid).

I wonder if your child is a non-AAP kid in a center school and perhaps you see a heirarchy (real or perceived) that is not necessarily happening at other schools.

Great post last poster!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also don't understand the ",missed opportunities" of friendship. In that dopey scenario aren't 4th graders missing out on friendships with 3rd and 5th graders because they aren't in the same classes? Aren't kids who live in the same large neighborhood but are split between School A and School B missing out on
friendships?

A child doesn't need to be exposed to 150 kids to make friends. In some small schools there may only be two classes in the grade. Are those kids suffering because there aren't another 50-75 peers at the school?

It really is looking for a problem where there shouldn't be one.

I think the problem is that there's an academic segregation going on at the center schools. So that the GE kids never get to hang out with the academic superstars and the academic superstars never hang out with kids who may be on grade level or even struggling. This makes for a very segregated way of living and was the reason tracking went away in the first place. I think many people are supportive of kids getting lessons at their academic level. What they aren't supportive of is situation in elementary where kids are only with like minded kids whether that's race, intelligence, or parent income level. In high school it makes more sense to specialize because children are figuring out what they want to major in. Can you not understand how a kid who is in GE might think he's too dumb to even hang out with the AAP kids if they are so segregated or an AAP kid thinking the other kids are so dumb they aren't worth hanging out with? That type of attitude stays with people throughout their lives.

you're assuming or projecting that kids in each group think the AAP kids are superior and the non-AAP kids are inferior. I don't think that is happening. They just simply don't think about the other group...at all. Maybe at some schools your presumed mindset is true. It's not something I'm aware of at my kid's school... maybe b/c the parents aren't in a twist about who's in AAP and who's not. They are simply co-located. And there's nothing inherently wrong with that.... also, I take issue with your suggestion that the non-AAP classes are all "on grade level or struggling" -- there are smart, capable kids in non-AAP classes as well. You make non-AAP seem like it is second class. That's not how I see it (I also have a kid in gen. ed), that's not how my AAP kid sees it (DC doesn't think of the non-AAP kids AT ALL), and that's not how my gen. ed kid sees it (DC2 doesn't think of the AAP kids at all and doesn't desire to be an AAP kid).

I wonder if your child is a non-AAP kid in a center school and perhaps you see a heirarchy (real or perceived) that is not necessarily happening at other schools.

Great post last poster!

+2