Catholic school or FCPS AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:During our tour of St. Louis we were astonished at how orderly and attentive the kids were. They were quietly learning together, interacting in a respectful manner and working hard at their lessons. A huge difference from the crazy FCPS elementary school we came from where there are a ton of dysregulated kids shoved together in the same classroom with little help from trained professionals. I don’t begrudge the teachers at FCPS. They are doing their best. But most of them are not trained at being special ed teachers full time, which is what they have become.

We are moving schools in the fall.

This is pretty offensive to parents of kids with SN. I hope you are keeping this attitude to yourself.

Pp - why is this offensive? There are kids who have special needs and they need teachers who are equipped and trained to teach them. General education teachers generally are not those teachers.

Behavior issues does not = special needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Current AAP parent (2 kids in the program, 1 2nd grader accepted) who is switching to a Protestant private that is probably more similar to a parochial school than an independent or a church-based school: it depends.

When my kids moved from the gen ed classroom to AAP, we saw a substantial decrease in behavior issues. Even kids who had caused those issues before ceased to cause them as much - whether because of peer group, teachers, or expectations I don't know. The accelerated math pace helped keep my kids engaged. While not perfect, my kids definitely found peers.

What's causing us to move?

1. Biggest: we, including both parents and the kids, want the religious aspect in the education. That's not going to happen/shouldn't happen in public. We can finally afford it at a private that we think will provide a decent academic education to go with.

2. Language arts even in AAP is significantly lacking.

3. Tired of so many screens. New school still uses screens, but much more sparingly in the lower grades.

What do we feel we are missing out on?

1. Math. Our private doesn't offer the same math opportunities that FCPS does for late high school (BC calc and dual enrollment courses with GMU). We may be able to advocate for those or set our kids' own path if they are that advanced in math, but our school doesn't have that track. We go in knowing that.

2. All the money we would have been able to use for other things. We will miss it.

Catholic schools are not better for Math or Science. That is absurd.

Catholic school math programs can be just as good as math at public schools.

The difference is they are not willing to advance everyone/ as many early.

That doesn’t make the math program worse. Just different.

It’s only a “problem” if your child plans to switch to public in 9th. Then suddenly you are “behind”. But it’s easy to catch up by taking geometry the summer between 9 th and 10 th.

[Anonymous]

The problem with many Catholic schools is that there’s NO differentiation. The low IQ kids are kept in with the regular classes and drag down and slow down the entire class. Sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That’s an interesting article and reflects the discussions in my district as well (DCPS). The goal is to make things equal, but the result is students with means are taking advanced math as an extracurricular and the kids without means lose their path to advanced math. It’s creating a larger disparity.

And that is what bugs me the most about these elected school board members, in many localities, who talk incessantly about Equity, but then either (a) do nothing or (b) cut the pathways that enable students from lower-income households to advance academically, always done in the name of Equity. Well, either a or b are the least equitable things a school board could possibly choose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s an interesting article and reflects the discussions in my district as well (DCPS). The goal is to make things equal, but the result is students with means are taking advanced math as an extracurricular and the kids without means lose their path to advanced math. It’s creating a larger disparity.

And that is what bugs me the most about these elected school board members, in many localities, who talk incessantly about Equity, but then either (a) do nothing or (b) cut the pathways that enable students from lower-income households to advance academically, always done in the name of Equity. Well, either a or b are the least equitable things a school board could possibly choose.

Public schools' current goal is equity in "student results". However the goal should be equality in the opportunities provided. The kids then differentiate themselves depending on their abilities and preferences. Providing opportunities and support to all students seem costly to them, and hard so instead they just get rid of some advancing opportunities. Example: Starting next year AAP math education for 3rd and 4th grade will not be accelerated. In AAP 5th grade kids will be suddenly accelerated to 6th grade. I don't see how this approach is better in any way for everyone.

Even the communist Soviet Union had a "sink or swim" approach in their education. Their goal was never "equality of student outcomes".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem with many Catholic schools is that there’s NO differentiation. The low IQ kids are kept in with the regular classes and drag down and slow down the entire class. Sad.

This isn’t true. Those kids all get push in or pull out help. They don’t slow down the class. The ones who are above get enrichment in certain subjects or leveled math.

Also, kids who need extra help aren’t necessarily low IQ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with many Catholic schools is that there’s NO differentiation. The low IQ kids are kept in with the regular classes and drag down and slow down the entire class. Sad.

This isn’t true. Those kids all get push in or pull out help. They don’t slow down the class. The ones who are above get enrichment in certain subjects or leveled math.

Also, kids who need extra help aren’t necessarily low IQ.

PP above. I’m speaking about St. Louis and St. Mary’s, which is the context of the thread. Both are good schools.

[Anonymous]

Some Catholic schools do offer differentiation. (It may vary by school.) They definitely require certain grades and test scores to take the advanced math. My 3 very different kids all took different math options in MS.

[Anonymous]

The point of that article from Cambridge isn't 8th grade algebra specifically. It's the fact that many public school systems, including FCPS, are now at least partly opposed to the idea of the smartest, luckiest, most privileged and prepared kids getting further and further ahead. Because of political goals and professional incentives.

Private and religious schools, by contrast, are relatively more committed to helping each and every student reach their full God-given potential. Private schools get paid by individual families, so they have a different set of incentives than public schools that get paid by governments.

FCPS has lots of great administrators and teachers. And they have AAP programs that in many cases are better than the advanced options offered by private schools. My point is just that FCPS is less committed to helping the best students separate from the pack than they used to be. That doesn't mean FCPS isn't great. It just means that today's AAP isn't run, celebrated, or supported the way it was 20 or 30 years ago. And so the relative benefit of choosing AAP over private is smaller than it was 20 or 30 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The point of that article from Cambridge isn't 8th grade algebra specifically. It's the fact that many public school systems, including FCPS, are now at least partly opposed to the idea of the smartest, luckiest, most privileged and prepared kids getting further and further ahead. Because of political goals and professional incentives.

Private and religious schools, by contrast, are relatively more committed to helping each and every student reach their full God-given potential. Private schools get paid by individual families, so they have a different set of incentives than public schools that get paid by governments.

FCPS has lots of great administrators and teachers. And they have AAP programs that in many cases are better than the advanced options offered by private schools. My point is just that FCPS is less committed to helping the best students separate from the pack than they used to be. That doesn't mean FCPS isn't great. It just means that today's AAP isn't run, celebrated, or supported the way it was 20 or 30 years ago. And so the relative benefit of choosing AAP over private is smaller than it was 20 or 30 years ago.

Why does god give some children more potential than others?

[Anonymous]

He doesn't. All children have equal potential scores in all academic subjects, unless they are given unfair advantages. That's why AAP programs have had to change in recent decades. The old AAP programs unfairly compounded the benefits of early academic success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He doesn't. All children have equal potential scores in all academic subjects, unless they are given unfair advantages. That's why AAP programs have had to change in recent decades. The old AAP programs unfairly compounded the benefits of early academic success.

Anyone with more than one kid can tell you that's ridiculous.

Yes privilege, parents' education level, etc play a role but at the end of the day not every kid has the same aptitude for every thing.

[Anonymous]

Aptitudes are just the result of unfair luck. Either nature or nurture. Just because a kid has smart parents or gets read to at bedtime or gets a fancy pre-school does not mean that he or she has the "right" to move faster through the curriculum. Instead of privileged kids getting to rush ahead, they should have to slow down, let everyone else catch up, and then everyone can accelerate together.