AAP should be eliminated as it’s not the path to equity

[Anonymous]

6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Reading once a week at the end of the day for one hour? Am I missing something? What are they doing the rest of the time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Reading once a week at the end of the day for one hour? Am I missing something? What are they doing the rest of the time?

Our reading block is daily for one hour at the end of the day. In that one hour, I teach a lesson and pull a group. Kids who are not working with me are reading independently and working on LA tasks. But the kids are done come 3pm so in that hour, I am also spending time redirecting kids. I don’t blame them. Our instructional blocks are too long to begin with. We have a separate writing and word study block. So a total of 2 hours of LA a day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Unfortunately the latest fad in education is equity so meeting kids where they are is the opposite of what they're doing. They seem to believe that giving all kids a watered down curriculum helps those on the low end rather than trying to help all students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Unfortunately the latest fad in education is equity so meeting kids where they are is the opposite of what they're doing. They seem to believe that giving all kids a watered down curriculum helps those on the low end rather than trying to help all students.

“Closing the achievement gap from the top down.”

If you cannot find ways to bring up the lowest-performing students, you can still narrow or close the achievement gap by taking away opportunities for the top performing students. The result is the same: the achievement gap narrows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Unfortunately the latest fad in education is equity so meeting kids where they are is the opposite of what they're doing. They seem to believe that giving all kids a watered down curriculum helps those on the low end rather than trying to help all students.

“Closing the achievement gap from the top down.”

If you cannot find ways to bring up the lowest-performing students, you can still narrow or close the achievement gap by taking away opportunities for the top performing students. The result is the same: the achievement gap narrows.

The worst part is that this also hurts the high achieving URMs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Just wanted to say,

THANK YOU!

I am convinced being a teacher in FCPS in 2023 is an extremely challenging and difficult job. But it is also crucially important since, (not to be too cliche) the children are our future. Many of us parents appreciate the effort you put it at work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Unfortunately the latest fad in education is equity so meeting kids where they are is the opposite of what they're doing. They seem to believe that giving all kids a watered down curriculum helps those on the low end rather than trying to help all students.

There is an equity gap between plumbers and engineers. To close the gap, it takes a lot of effort to elevate plumbers to engineers. So the easiest path with quick political gains is to demote engineers to plumbers. Equity solution!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Unfortunately the latest fad in education is equity so meeting kids where they are is the opposite of what they're doing. They seem to believe that giving all kids a watered down curriculum helps those on the low end rather than trying to help all students.

There is an equity gap between plumbers and engineers. To close the gap, it takes a lot of effort to elevate plumbers to engineers. So the easiest path with quick political gains is to demote engineers to plumbers. Equity solution!

But that will only hurt society as a whole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Unfortunately the latest fad in education is equity so meeting kids where they are is the opposite of what they're doing. They seem to believe that giving all kids a watered down curriculum helps those on the low end rather than trying to help all students.

“Closing the achievement gap from the top down.”

If you cannot find ways to bring up the lowest-performing students, you can still narrow or close the achievement gap by taking away opportunities for the top performing students. The result is the same: the achievement gap narrows.

The worst part is that this also hurts the high achieving URMs.

The thing I find incredibly dumb about this is it assumes that all people have the same needs and goals which is just not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Unfortunately the latest fad in education is equity so meeting kids where they are is the opposite of what they're doing. They seem to believe that giving all kids a watered down curriculum helps those on the low end rather than trying to help all students.

“Closing the achievement gap from the top down.”

If you cannot find ways to bring up the lowest-performing students, you can still narrow or close the achievement gap by taking away opportunities for the top performing students. The result is the same: the achievement gap narrows.

How can anyone seriously believe it's a good idea to try to force "equality of outcome?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Unfortunately the latest fad in education is equity so meeting kids where they are is the opposite of what they're doing. They seem to believe that giving all kids a watered down curriculum helps those on the low end rather than trying to help all students.

“Closing the achievement gap from the top down.”

If you cannot find ways to bring up the lowest-performing students, you can still narrow or close the achievement gap by taking away opportunities for the top performing students. The result is the same: the achievement gap narrows.

How can anyone seriously believe it's a good idea to try to force "equality of outcome?"

equity politicians and their voting block

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting much of Ibram Kendi’s theories have influenced the course of public education in the last few years. The idea of getting rid of Gifted and Talented classes, tracking and dismantling AAP out of “fairness.”

Basically lower the bar to allow more people to pass the grade. Even if it makes the entire country less productive and forces classes to teach to the lowest common denominator or to disruptive students.

It’s akin to the same sort of progressive criminal justice, softened, approach we’ve seen to crime in the last few years, where the penalties for violent crime or shoplifting are simply less punitive (restorative justice as an alternative to incarceration etc) or have been eliminated altogether out of “fairness.”

Basically an all around watering down to achieve a perfect society, except that, as shown by test scores, and a 38% increase in violent crime in DC year over year from 2022 to 2023, this type of idealism based approach isn’t practical.

Maybe let the advanced kids succeed in advanced classes and maybe arrest and prosecute the violent criminals might work.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AAP is not a gifted program. It is mainly a way for parents with means to get their kids segregated from the poor kids, disguised as a gifted program. (Let’s not pretend these parents aren’t prepping their kids for the two tests which are meant to be taken totally unprepped, or that they’re not “contributing” to their children’s work samples, and when all else fails they’ll pay for and prep their kid for an IQ test…)

The problem is then everyone pretends that all of the kids left behind are getting an adequate and appropriate education. Wrong! The average, above average, and poor gifted kids are being left to flounder jn gen ed which is essentially remedial at this point. But the rich “gifted” kids are at centers so I guess all is well.

All the kids are taking the same standardized tests. They all have equal access to the same programs. If you are able to demonstrate a high level of knowledge in subjects, it makes perfect sense to be able to receive a higher level of acceleration and material taught. Just the same if a child tests low, remedial measures are put in place.

So you prepped your kids for the tests. That is essentially cheating - it is not indicative of your child’s giftedness. Which, again, is a HUGE part of the problem.

(Also, does no one else think it’s insane to basically permanently track kids at ages 6-7? Johnny didn’t score as well on a test he didn’t prepare for in second grade [because you’re not supposed to prepare for it] as Timmy whose Mommy was giving him practice tests for three months, so Johnny is essentially screwed for the the rest of his time in FCPS?)

To get rid of APP, everyone needs to vote for the Democrat-backed candidates running for school board positions.

The republicans will only keep AAP in place.

Vote D and put an end to AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6th grade AAP teacher here…

1) I meet with all my kids for reading once a week in small groups. We only have 1 hour for reading and it is at the end of the day. Between the lesson, pulling a group and monitoring behaviors , that is all I can do in the time frame to make it meaningful. Also, LA instruction has changed drastically since science of reading has been implemented and next year will look even different once we get basals. I honestly have no idea how the county plans to utilize these.

2) Our school looks at IReady data to place kids in Advanced Math if they were in Gen Ed math.

3) Some schools don’t have the staffing for departmentalization and grouping kids. My team has only 3 teachers. If there are 60 kids and only 15 are above, 10 are on grade level and the rest are below, the sections will be imbalanced. It would be doable with four teachers but it honestly depends on numbers and needs.

4) I think a huge reason Gen Ed has been watered down so much is due to the influx of ESL students. The ESOL staffing is a joke in ES. In middle/high school all Level 1/2 ESL students are in ESL classes for all major subjects. Levels 3/4 are usually in team taught and have an extra class. My school has 3 ESOL teachers for 200 kids.

5) What I would like to see? If we are going to test these kids yearly, use the data and offer any kid adv reading or math that needs it. They need to test in yearly. As for SS/Science, a lot of the AAP materials can be used with all students. I would like the ESOL staffing ratio to be 1 teacher for 25-30 kids. I would like the ability for the school systems to expel students with behaviors.

Unfortunately the latest fad in education is equity so meeting kids where they are is the opposite of what they're doing. They seem to believe that giving all kids a watered down curriculum helps those on the low end rather than trying to help all students.

“Closing the achievement gap from the top down.”

If you cannot find ways to bring up the lowest-performing students, you can still narrow or close the achievement gap by taking away opportunities for the top performing students. The result is the same: the achievement gap narrows.

How can anyone seriously believe it's a good idea to try to force "equality of outcome?"

equity politicians and their voting block

This sounds like fiction. Can you point to one with an example of such a policy?