AAP Results 2023

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Some chance” is not good enough. At our center, the AAP classes are usually maxing out the capacity. How will an AAP teacher who has 29 kids have more time to deal with a disruptive kid than a Gen Ed teacher who has 23 kids? The parents need to be proactive about the diagnosis and should pursue additional support for their child. It’s not fair to the rest of the class especially since AAP is supposed to move faster than Gen Ed. Likely these gifted disruptive kids need to go to a private school like Nysmith to meet their needs. And frankly the “gifted” disruptive kids at our school are bullies who hit other kids. They do not belong in AAP.

What Center are you at with only 23 kids in Gen Ed? My child's base school is a Center and they have 2 Gen Ed classes with 29-31 kids.

And I think you are advocating for bullies to be in Gen Ed? Am I reading that right? Just because a kid doesn't score above 141 on the COGAT doesn't mean that they should have to be in classes with bullies.

No they don’t belong in Gen Ed either. Nobody should have to deal with these bullies. Ship them to boarding school? They’re probably “Gifted” enough for a scholarship if they need it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

I’m on board with that model. IF honors was admissions based and not self-selected like it is in MS and HS. I’m not a fan of pulling my kid out of our base school to go to a center. But unfortunately it’s our only choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

Sure, but once it's 2%, don't expect centers. Those cost money and are an administrative headache. It's much easier to anger 2% of parents and just make GT an occasional class with an AART.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

Sure, but once it's 2%, don't expect centers. Those cost money and are an administrative headache. It's much easier to anger 2% of parents and just make GT an occasional class with an AART.

unfortunately, it's required by Virginia education law 8 VAC 20-40-60A.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

Sure, but once it's 2%, don't expect centers. Those cost money and are an administrative headache. It's much easier to anger 2% of parents and just make GT an occasional class with an AART.

unfortunately, it's required by Virginia education law 8 VAC 20-40-60A.

A program is required. A program as extensive as AAP is not required. Separate GT classes aren't even required.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

Sure, but once it's 2%, don't expect centers. Those cost money and are an administrative headache. It's much easier to anger 2% of parents and just make GT an occasional class with an AART.

There could be just a few centers with larger catchments. Bussing would be complicated. Perhaps don’t offer busses unless within a certain radius.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

I’m on board with that model. IF honors was admissions based and not self-selected like it is in MS and HS. I’m not a fan of pulling my kid out of our base school to go to a center. But unfortunately it’s our only choice.

What's even better is Honors for all model where all students are lifted to a higher level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

I’m on board with that model. IF honors was admissions based and not self-selected like it is in MS and HS. I’m not a fan of pulling my kid out of our base school to go to a center. But unfortunately it’s our only choice.

What's even better is Honors for all model where all students are lifted to a higher level.

How would that practically work with the wide range of aptitudes? There are kids who struggle with addition. And then there are kids like mine who started learning multiplication in preschool (teacher assessed kid as ready). Why should they be learning the same material at the same pace?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

I’m on board with that model. IF honors was admissions based and not self-selected like it is in MS and HS. I’m not a fan of pulling my kid out of our base school to go to a center. But unfortunately it’s our only choice.

What's even better is Honors for all model where all students are lifted to a higher level.

How would that practically work with the wide range of aptitudes? There are kids who struggle with addition. And then there are kids like mine who started learning multiplication in preschool (teacher assessed kid as ready). Why should they be learning the same material at the same pace?

Unfortunately, that is going to be the way forward, at least with math.

FCPS appears to be doing away with accelerated math in favor of enriched math. Everyone will have the same standard, some will just do harder versions of the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

I’m on board with that model. IF honors was admissions based and not self-selected like it is in MS and HS. I’m not a fan of pulling my kid out of our base school to go to a center. But unfortunately it’s our only choice.

What's even better is Honors for all model where all students are lifted to a higher level.

How would that practically work with the wide range of aptitudes? There are kids who struggle with addition. And then there are kids like mine who started learning multiplication in preschool (teacher assessed kid as ready). Why should they be learning the same material at the same pace?

Unfortunately, that is going to be the way forward, at least with math.

FCPS appears to be doing away with accelerated math in favor of enriched math. Everyone will have the same standard, some will just do harder versions of the same thing.

What are you basing that on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

I’m on board with that model. IF honors was admissions based and not self-selected like it is in MS and HS. I’m not a fan of pulling my kid out of our base school to go to a center. But unfortunately it’s our only choice.

What's even better is Honors for all model where all students are lifted to a higher level.

How would that practically work with the wide range of aptitudes? There are kids who struggle with addition. And then there are kids like mine who started learning multiplication in preschool (teacher assessed kid as ready). Why should they be learning the same material at the same pace?

Unfortunately, that is going to be the way forward, at least with math.

FCPS appears to be doing away with accelerated math in favor of enriched math. Everyone will have the same standard, some will just do harder versions of the same thing.

What are you basing that on?

Its in another thread in the FCPS forum about E3 math. Its on FCPS website.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

I’m on board with that model. IF honors was admissions based and not self-selected like it is in MS and HS. I’m not a fan of pulling my kid out of our base school to go to a center. But unfortunately it’s our only choice.

What's even better is Honors for all model where all students are lifted to a higher level.

How would that practically work with the wide range of aptitudes? There are kids who struggle with addition. And then there are kids like mine who started learning multiplication in preschool (teacher assessed kid as ready). Why should they be learning the same material at the same pace?

Unfortunately, that is going to be the way forward, at least with math.

FCPS appears to be doing away with accelerated math in favor of enriched math. Everyone will have the same standard, some will just do harder versions of the same thing.

What are you basing that on?

Its in another thread in the FCPS forum about E3 math. Its on FCPS website.

you mean the proposal that's gone nowhere? Keep on thinking that everyone is out to get you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:History teacher, “blah blah volksgeist blah blah.”
Student reflexively chimes in, “Spirit of the people!”
Teacher, “Oh, you speak German?”
Student, “What? No, that was just a guess based on ‘volkswagon’ and ‘poltergeist.’”
That comment came from a student with a measured IQ of 150.
IQ tests results above 150 are basically a wash; practically, they only mean that a student is surpassingly bright. Interacting with a surpassingly bright person tends to quickly give you an impression that they’re not really on your same wavelength—exactly the same way as interacting with a surpassingly dim person. The bright person may struggle to follow your thoughts and make themselves understood. Very high and very low IQs are both rightly considered “special education” cases because of their specialized learning needs.
The main thing you’d probably notice when talking to (or teaching!) a surpassingly bright person is the way they make connections. You explain waves, and suddenly the whole electromagnetic spectrum makes sense to them. You explain Frankenstein, and suddenly the complex interplay of naturalism and humanism in the 19th Century imagination makes sense to them. They mostly just realize these connections instantly without thinking through them. They don’t necessarily learn facts faster than anyone else, but they understand much faster.
It’s a trip, seriously.
As an educator, there’s no keeping up with them. Teaching them becomes 95% a matter of keeping their attention and creativity engaged. If teaching regulars classes is a bit like dogwalking…
They CAN run, but guidance and prompting helps them get from point A to point B.
Then teaching the severely gifted is like being the caretaker of stallions.
They cannot help but run, and fast…so you care for them, feed them, and throw open the gates. You don’t “lead” them so much as “suggest a direction.”
When the gifted student asks, “Teacher, why are we running?” you say, “There are wonders just over the horizon,” and rumble rumble go the hoofbeats.

It's a public school, if they want a spiral guid for a teacher, they need to look elsewhere. There are 25 other kids in the class an no one has time to indulge the genius

and the gifted program should only reserve for the truly gifted. like for the top 2-4%, that's how most of the public gifted program are directed for in the country.

I'd totally support that, but I'd also expect the gifted program to shrink to a pull out a week once the 20% of kids currently being served no longer have parents pressing for AAP to be what it is. A large program means a large group of parents advocating for that program, a small program means a few parents who can easily be ignored.

yes, the current AAP with 20% of the students can be easily integrated into general education, each grade can have classes with honors and general language art and math. I believe that's how Montgomery County is operated under. Then FCPS can reserve the AAP to only the top 2-4%

I’m on board with that model. IF honors was admissions based and not self-selected like it is in MS and HS. I’m not a fan of pulling my kid out of our base school to go to a center. But unfortunately it’s our only choice.

What's even better is Honors for all model where all students are lifted to a higher level.

How would that practically work with the wide range of aptitudes? There are kids who struggle with addition. And then there are kids like mine who started learning multiplication in preschool (teacher assessed kid as ready). Why should they be learning the same material at the same pace?

if your kid is learning multiplication in preschool and grasp the concept, then your kid might be the 2-4%. my second grader is doing 4th and 5th grade math and math Olympiad problems, and preschooler learning 2nd and 3rd grade math.