Those of you with kids in both AAP and gen ed...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP keep your daughter in AAP. Who cares about her grades. The curriculum is much better and the peer group is more advanced. It’ll be good for her as long as you de-emphasize performance and reward effort.

Op is concerned about her kid being in gen ed.

I thought she said somewhere her kid wasn’t keeping up in AAP? If that’s the case who cares.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP keep your daughter in AAP. Who cares about her grades. The curriculum is much better and the peer group is more advanced. It’ll be good for her as long as you de-emphasize performance and reward effort.

Op is concerned about her kid being in gen ed.

I thought she said somewhere her kid wasn’t keeping up in AAP? If that’s the case who cares.

Because you yourself said the curriculum is much better and they have a more advanced peer group?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP keep your daughter in AAP. Who cares about her grades. The curriculum is much better and the peer group is more advanced. It’ll be good for her as long as you de-emphasize performance and reward effort.

Op is concerned about her kid being in gen ed.

I thought she said somewhere her kid wasn’t keeping up in AAP? If that’s the case who cares.

Because you yourself said the curriculum is much better and they have a more advanced peer group?

Yes, I mean who cares if she isn’t keeping up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. This is my fear. That my child will be completely neglected in gen ed. But she doesn’t realistically belong in full time AAP either. Are you supplementing?

Yes she does.
Trust me. In the current model, of your child will be high-performing in gen ed, she will get a muuuuuuuch better education and much more attention from the teacher if she is in AAP instead of remaining in the gen ed class twiddling her thumbs as the teacher focuses all his/her time on assisting students who are 2-3 grades below benchmark.
The spectrum is very, very wide in the typical gen ed classroom, as opposed to when we were kids, OP. If your child can do the work, but it will maybe be a bit of a struggle for her, you won’t regret pushing to get her into it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP keep your daughter in AAP. Who cares about her grades. The curriculum is much better and the peer group is more advanced. It’ll be good for her as long as you de-emphasize performance and reward effort.

Op is concerned about her kid being in gen ed.

I thought she said somewhere her kid wasn’t keeping up in AAP? If that’s the case who cares.

Because you yourself said the curriculum is much better and they have a more advanced peer group?

Yes, I mean who cares if she isn’t keeping up.

Seems maybe this last comment was said with a bit of sarcasm and eye roll, but honestly this is exactly the kind of argument that proponents of eliminating advanced classes use to argue having low-performing students in same class with the high-performing ones. So which is it? Do students benefit from being taught at a higher level than their current ability or no?
If yes, then OP should go ahead and try to have her kid placed in AAP. If not then hopefully you agree that “ability grouping” is actually beneficial to students in that teaching then at their own alongside others who are also learning at that same pace is ideal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. This is my fear. That my child will be completely neglected in gen ed. But she doesn’t realistically belong in full time AAP either. Are you supplementing?

Yes she does.
Trust me. In the current model, of your child will be high-performing in gen ed, she will get a muuuuuuuch better education and much more attention from the teacher if she is in AAP instead of remaining in the gen ed class twiddling her thumbs as the teacher focuses all his/her time on assisting students who are 2-3 grades below benchmark.
The spectrum is very, very wide in the typical gen ed classroom, as opposed to when we were kids, OP. If your child can do the work, but it will maybe be a bit of a struggle for her, you won’t regret pushing to get her into it

Funny, this is the same complaint of parents whose kids actually need to be in AAP -- that there are underperforming students that shouldn't be in AAP slowing the whole class down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. This is my fear. That my child will be completely neglected in gen ed. But she doesn’t realistically belong in full time AAP either. Are you supplementing?

Yes she does.
Trust me. In the current model, of your child will be high-performing in gen ed, she will get a muuuuuuuch better education and much more attention from the teacher if she is in AAP instead of remaining in the gen ed class twiddling her thumbs as the teacher focuses all his/her time on assisting students who are 2-3 grades below benchmark.
The spectrum is very, very wide in the typical gen ed classroom, as opposed to when we were kids, OP. If your child can do the work, but it will maybe be a bit of a struggle for her, you won’t regret pushing to get her into it

Funny, this is the same complaint of parents whose kids actually need to be in AAP -- that there are underperforming students that shouldn't be in AAP slowing the whole class down.

Fair enough. There isn’t a perfect model since they eliminated any nuance in leveled approaches. Since the two options are now either AAP or “not AAP” —it does stand to reason that given the huge differences in academic-level across a gen ed classroom (in reading, some kids can barely decode by 3rd grade and others were reading at 5th/6th grade level), it definitely benefits the high-performing but not quite AAP kid to be in the AAP class more than it would benefit her to not be in that class.
And in her case, you can argue that staying in gen ed. with other kids who are not as high performing diminishes the capacity of the teacher to teach to her level and I would agree...except that unlike admitting a borderline-high performing kid in AAP, in gen ed the low performing kids are very, very low in comparison. It’s astounding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. This is my fear. That my child will be completely neglected in gen ed. But she doesn’t realistically belong in full time AAP either. Are you supplementing?

Yes she does.
Trust me. In the current model, of your child will be high-performing in gen ed, she will get a muuuuuuuch better education and much more attention from the teacher if she is in AAP instead of remaining in the gen ed class twiddling her thumbs as the teacher focuses all his/her time on assisting students who are 2-3 grades below benchmark.
The spectrum is very, very wide in the typical gen ed classroom, as opposed to when we were kids, OP. If your child can do the work, but it will maybe be a bit of a struggle for her, you won’t regret pushing to get her into it

Funny, this is the same complaint of parents whose kids actually need to be in AAP -- that there are underperforming students that shouldn't be in AAP slowing the whole class down.

Yes but typically they aren’t “slowing the whole class down” by 2-3 grade levels!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. This is my fear. That my child will be completely neglected in gen ed. But she doesn’t realistically belong in full time AAP either. Are you supplementing?

Yes she does.
Trust me. In the current model, of your child will be high-performing in gen ed, she will get a muuuuuuuch better education and much more attention from the teacher if she is in AAP instead of remaining in the gen ed class twiddling her thumbs as the teacher focuses all his/her time on assisting students who are 2-3 grades below benchmark.
The spectrum is very, very wide in the typical gen ed classroom, as opposed to when we were kids, OP. If your child can do the work, but it will maybe be a bit of a struggle for her, you won’t regret pushing to get her into it

Funny, this is the same complaint of parents whose kids actually need to be in AAP -- that there are underperforming students that shouldn't be in AAP slowing the whole class down.

Yes but typically they aren’t “slowing the whole class down” by 2-3 grade levels!

put enough disruptive 2E kids in a class, and things can grind to a halt. This year, at least teachers could mute them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. This is my fear. That my child will be completely neglected in gen ed. But she doesn’t realistically belong in full time AAP either. Are you supplementing?

Yes she does.
Trust me. In the current model, of your child will be high-performing in gen ed, she will get a muuuuuuuch better education and much more attention from the teacher if she is in AAP instead of remaining in the gen ed class twiddling her thumbs as the teacher focuses all his/her time on assisting students who are 2-3 grades below benchmark.
The spectrum is very, very wide in the typical gen ed classroom, as opposed to when we were kids, OP. If your child can do the work, but it will maybe be a bit of a struggle for her, you won’t regret pushing to get her into it

Sorry, no. Those 2-3 below benchmark kids will be pulled out for enrichment/extra work. The variety in the "gen ed" is actually not quite as wide as you suggest. At least it wasn't in our school. AAP may offer some additional curriculum, mostly in math, but by MS and HS it doesn't really matter. My kid killed MS honors math and is set up for an advance HS track. She was a "gen ed" kid. There many like her, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. This is my fear. That my child will be completely neglected in gen ed. But she doesn’t realistically belong in full time AAP either. Are you supplementing?

Yes she does.
Trust me. In the current model, of your child will be high-performing in gen ed, she will get a muuuuuuuch better education and much more attention from the teacher if she is in AAP instead of remaining in the gen ed class twiddling her thumbs as the teacher focuses all his/her time on assisting students who are 2-3 grades below benchmark.
The spectrum is very, very wide in the typical gen ed classroom, as opposed to when we were kids, OP. If your child can do the work, but it will maybe be a bit of a struggle for her, you won’t regret pushing to get her into it

Sorry, no. Those 2-3 below benchmark kids will be pulled out for enrichment/extra work. The variety in the "gen ed" is actually not quite as wide as you suggest. At least it wasn't in our school. AAP may offer some additional curriculum, mostly in math, but by MS and HS it doesn't really matter. My kid killed MS honors math and is set up for an advance HS track. She was a "gen ed" kid. There many like her, too.

lots of schools start advanced math in 3rd anyway. If you aren't at a title I school, there won't be much different between AAP and a gen ed kid taking advanced math

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. This is my fear. That my child will be completely neglected in gen ed. But she doesn’t realistically belong in full time AAP either. Are you supplementing?

Yes she does.
Trust me. In the current model, of your child will be high-performing in gen ed, she will get a muuuuuuuch better education and much more attention from the teacher if she is in AAP instead of remaining in the gen ed class twiddling her thumbs as the teacher focuses all his/her time on assisting students who are 2-3 grades below benchmark.
The spectrum is very, very wide in the typical gen ed classroom, as opposed to when we were kids, OP. If your child can do the work, but it will maybe be a bit of a struggle for her, you won’t regret pushing to get her into it

Funny, this is the same complaint of parents whose kids actually need to be in AAP -- that there are underperforming students that shouldn't be in AAP slowing the whole class down.

Yes but typically they aren’t “slowing the whole class down” by 2-3 grade levels!

put enough disruptive 2E kids in a class, and things can grind to a halt. This year, at least teachers could mute them

This is definitely valid. Unfortunate for the 2E kid as well as those who are simply accelerated learners actually. Because in that scenario neither is getting her needs met.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. This is my fear. That my child will be completely neglected in gen ed. But she doesn’t realistically belong in full time AAP either. Are you supplementing?

Yes she does.
Trust me. In the current model, of your child will be high-performing in gen ed, she will get a muuuuuuuch better education and much more attention from the teacher if she is in AAP instead of remaining in the gen ed class twiddling her thumbs as the teacher focuses all his/her time on assisting students who are 2-3 grades below benchmark.
The spectrum is very, very wide in the typical gen ed classroom, as opposed to when we were kids, OP. If your child can do the work, but it will maybe be a bit of a struggle for her, you won’t regret pushing to get her into it

Sorry, no. Those 2-3 below benchmark kids will be pulled out for enrichment/extra work. The variety in the "gen ed" is actually not quite as wide as you suggest. At least it wasn't in our school. AAP may offer some additional curriculum, mostly in math, but by MS and HS it doesn't really matter. My kid killed MS honors math and is set up for an advance HS track. She was a "gen ed" kid. There many like her, too.

As a teacher I can tell you this varies. Widely. It’s excellent that your child was able to thrive in gen ed. when it sounds like she could have functioned quite nicely alongside the AAP-identified students. In your case, it didn’t seem to be a detriment to her overall advancement through the system. That is not always the way it goes. I usually advocate for kids on the bubble to get pushed into AAP in elementary because I do believe the research that suggests that kids —even the ones performing at the higher levels—benefit from that scenario.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. This is my fear. That my child will be completely neglected in gen ed. But she doesn’t realistically belong in full time AAP either. Are you supplementing?

Yes she does.
Trust me. In the current model, of your child will be high-performing in gen ed, she will get a muuuuuuuch better education and much more attention from the teacher if she is in AAP instead of remaining in the gen ed class twiddling her thumbs as the teacher focuses all his/her time on assisting students who are 2-3 grades below benchmark.
The spectrum is very, very wide in the typical gen ed classroom, as opposed to when we were kids, OP. If your child can do the work, but it will maybe be a bit of a struggle for her, you won’t regret pushing to get her into it

Sorry, no. Those 2-3 below benchmark kids will be pulled out for enrichment/extra work. The variety in the "gen ed" is actually not quite as wide as you suggest. At least it wasn't in our school. AAP may offer some additional curriculum, mostly in math, but by MS and HS it doesn't really matter. My kid killed MS honors math and is set up for an advance HS track. She was a "gen ed" kid. There many like her, too.

lots of schools start advanced math in 3rd anyway. If you aren't at a title I school, there won't be much different between AAP and a gen ed kid taking advanced math

Lots of schools don’t start advanced math until 5th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. This is my fear. That my child will be completely neglected in gen ed. But she doesn’t realistically belong in full time AAP either. Are you supplementing?

Yes she does.
Trust me. In the current model, of your child will be high-performing in gen ed, she will get a muuuuuuuch better education and much more attention from the teacher if she is in AAP instead of remaining in the gen ed class twiddling her thumbs as the teacher focuses all his/her time on assisting students who are 2-3 grades below benchmark.
The spectrum is very, very wide in the typical gen ed classroom, as opposed to when we were kids, OP. If your child can do the work, but it will maybe be a bit of a struggle for her, you won’t regret pushing to get her into it

Sorry, no. Those 2-3 below benchmark kids will be pulled out for enrichment/extra work. The variety in the "gen ed" is actually not quite as wide as you suggest. At least it wasn't in our school. AAP may offer some additional curriculum, mostly in math, but by MS and HS it doesn't really matter. My kid killed MS honors math and is set up for an advance HS track. She was a "gen ed" kid. There many like her, too.

lots of schools start advanced math in 3rd anyway. If you aren't at a title I school, there won't be much different between AAP and a gen ed kid taking advanced math

Lots of schools don’t start advanced math until 5th grade.

That should infuriate parents, especially parents with Gen Ed students who excel in math