Aside from math, what's the difference with AAP vs GenEd?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone speak to actual curriculum differences outside of math?

Are you looking for a side-by-side matrix? I do not think one exists as each teacher selects materials to address the Program of Studies requirements.

As an example, this is a link to the curriculum and resources for 3rd grade AAP:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/famework/Grade3.pdf

Just looking at a single section -- social studies with a focus on Ancient China and Ancient Egypt -- one resource is available from Kendall Hunt for the William & Mary Social Studies units.

Ancient China and Ancient Egypt are covered for all of Grade 3, per the FCPS Program of Studies:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/pos/documents/es/ss3.htm

A quick Google search shows a description of the William & Mary materials used in AAP:
https://education.wm.edu/centers/cfge/curriculum/socialstudies/materials/index.php

But this is just one example.

Our AAP school did not use the William and Mary materials for social studies. Anyone else or are we the only school that didn't use them?

It is not a requirement to use every resource listed.

True. We are not sure though of any differences between general ed and AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC tried one year of center during the Elem years and then went back to LLIV. DC said the only difference was that at the center they wasted classroom time dealing with boys that cried. DC also implied that some of the kids in the center classroom were actually less motivated - ie complacent. Really not sure the pace was any different. DC's grades were the same in both environments.

You truly think an 8/9 year old can accurately summarize the difference? Considering what you wrote, she couldn't, let alone that she couldn't possibly know what is the "only" difference. Was she in a base classroom everyday or was she at the teacher mtgs? Wouldn't they crying boy be class specific, not a base/aap difference?

I am one of the other posters.

Often times, highly gifted boys especially, fall into the twice exceptional range (gifted plus a special ed diagnosis like aspergers or ADHD).

They test very high academically, but have very uneven development in other areas. Likely, that person's daughter's class had several of these kinds of students. If your kid is a bright good student, it would probably be annoying or difficult to be around a high concentration of these kinds of kids. My child didn't mind because those boys were able to move very quickly academically, so the behavior was easier to overlook. That got better by fourth and fifth for sure as thse kids evened out.

No question there might be a kid or many kids who are 2e in AAP. That doesn't mean that an 8/9 year old can accurately state that is the only difference b/w AAP and base. You can see from these responses, parents don't really know either. The "more in depth and breath" is coming from the AAP orientation, I suspect. How can we know? It would be different school to school and then from teacher to teacher. Perhaps even a single teacher has different ability groups in her class, so it could even be a smaller group where some in base get x and others get y. You cannot ask a broad question like this on a board and get an answer. You also can't expect your 8/9 year old to accurately state what the differences are. You can see from this kid's answer, she didn't know (she has no idea about the behaviors in the other classes, she mentioned nothing about writing, science, math, reading, vocabulary, CML, etc.)

I totally agree with you. I was just explaining why the class might have had a lot of high strung boys.

In my kids' class, they were covering the curriculum much quicker than the other classes, AAP and gen ed. The teachers would give them extra or different lessons every few weeks to allow the other classes to catch up to where my kids class was at. This was sixth grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone speak to actual curriculum differences outside of math?

Are you looking for a side-by-side matrix? I do not think one exists as each teacher selects materials to address the Program of Studies requirements.

As an example, this is a link to the curriculum and resources for 3rd grade AAP:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/famework/Grade3.pdf

Just looking at a single section -- social studies with a focus on Ancient China and Ancient Egypt -- one resource is available from Kendall Hunt for the William & Mary Social Studies units.

Ancient China and Ancient Egypt are covered for all of Grade 3, per the FCPS Program of Studies:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/pos/documents/es/ss3.htm

A quick Google search shows a description of the William & Mary materials used in AAP:
https://education.wm.edu/centers/cfge/curriculum/socialstudies/materials/index.php

But this is just one example.

Our AAP school did not use the William and Mary materials for social studies. Anyone else or are we the only school that didn't use them?

It is not a requirement to use every resource listed.

True. We are not sure though of any differences between general ed and AAP.

Impossible to be "sure" as it depends on the classroom teacher, the school, the particular year, the make-up of kids in the class, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone speak to actual curriculum differences outside of math?

Are you looking for a side-by-side matrix? I do not think one exists as each teacher selects materials to address the Program of Studies requirements.

As an example, this is a link to the curriculum and resources for 3rd grade AAP:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/famework/Grade3.pdf

Just looking at a single section -- social studies with a focus on Ancient China and Ancient Egypt -- one resource is available from Kendall Hunt for the William & Mary Social Studies units.

Ancient China and Ancient Egypt are covered for all of Grade 3, per the FCPS Program of Studies:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/pos/documents/es/ss3.htm

A quick Google search shows a description of the William & Mary materials used in AAP:
https://education.wm.edu/centers/cfge/curriculum/socialstudies/materials/index.php

But this is just one example.

Our AAP school did not use the William and Mary materials for social studies. Anyone else or are we the only school that didn't use them?

It is not a requirement to use every resource listed.

True. We are not sure though of any differences between general ed and AAP.

Impossible to be "sure" as it depends on the classroom teacher, the school, the particular year, the make-up of kids in the class, etc.

OP is asking if there is any difference. Regardless of the school, are there any differences across the board or typical differences that many schools share?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone speak to actual curriculum differences outside of math?

Are you looking for a side-by-side matrix? I do not think one exists as each teacher selects materials to address the Program of Studies requirements.

As an example, this is a link to the curriculum and resources for 3rd grade AAP:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/famework/Grade3.pdf

Just looking at a single section -- social studies with a focus on Ancient China and Ancient Egypt -- one resource is available from Kendall Hunt for the William & Mary Social Studies units.

Ancient China and Ancient Egypt are covered for all of Grade 3, per the FCPS Program of Studies:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/pos/documents/es/ss3.htm

A quick Google search shows a description of the William & Mary materials used in AAP:
https://education.wm.edu/centers/cfge/curriculum/socialstudies/materials/index.php

But this is just one example.

Our AAP school did not use the William and Mary materials for social studies. Anyone else or are we the only school that didn't use them?

It is not a requirement to use every resource listed.

True. We are not sure though of any differences between general ed and AAP.

Impossible to be "sure" as it depends on the classroom teacher, the school, the particular year, the make-up of kids in the class, etc.

OP is asking if there is any difference. Regardless of the school, are there any differences across the board or typical differences that many schools share?

I think that is a hard question to answer given parents such as myself have one child in one situation- in our case, a center. No matter what we exchange with parents (in our case, back at the base school)- it's just little bit so of information and subjective in parent feedback. You would really need to have a parent who had one gen ed child at the same place as the AAP do local level IV and then go to center to know the difference. And that depends so much on teacher, school, etc. You really have to listen to specific feedback you have heard about your school options, take bits of the open house, make a decision.

[Anonymous]

The students.

Their ability to pick things up at a very quick pace, the fact thay many of them can goof off and half pay attention and still master the material, and having an entire class of similarly paced kids who have a similar desire to explore things at a level most kids their age aren't interested in doing.

Sprinkle that with a larger than typical number of 2E kids and you have the difference between AAP and most other classes.

[Anonymous]

Believe it or not, I have a Gen-Ed kid, was in pool did not get in AAP. He has lots of friends in AAP and it is strange that Gen-Ed kids are actually doing much more challenging work than AAP. Gen-ED teacher is phenomenal in understanding each child's weakness and strength and push them accordingly. The teacher has also helped kids overcome their weak points drastically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Believe it or not, I have a Gen-Ed kid, was in pool did not get in AAP. He has lots of friends in AAP and it is strange that Gen-Ed kids are actually doing much more challenging work than AAP. Gen-ED teacher is phenomenal in understanding each child's weakness and strength and push them accordingly. The teacher has also helped kids overcome their weak points drastically.

I totally believe it.

Contrary to what dcum would have you believe, gen ed is not a horrible punishment for bright kids who missed the pool. There are many exceptional teachers in the gen ed program, and many very bright kids as well.

[Anonymous]

My DC was at a center. One year, because of a bullying situation, DC was (by choice) placed in the GenEd compacted math/"advanced" science class for Q3 and Q4, but was in AAP for LA and Social Studies. So DC was in AAP math/science Q1 and Q2, but not Q3 and Q4. That was an interesting comparison for us.

At this school, the GenEd class was behind the AAP class in terms of coverage of class material. But the GenEd math/science teacher was superior. DC claims they learned a lot more. There was a "review" of a few sections after DC switched, and DC says new material was covered that had been missed in the AAP class. There was more "busy" type homework, but DC said the class was more in depth than the AAP class. The science portion of the class also had many labs, whereas the AAP math/science teacher did no labs at all. I suspect because the AAP teacher was lazy and had no classroom management skills, hence why my child had to change classes. The teacher could not control the classroom and did not even notice my child being mercilessly bullied.

So I do think that while the cohort matters some, the individual teacher matters more than almost anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Believe it or not, I have a Gen-Ed kid, was in pool did not get in AAP. He has lots of friends in AAP and it is strange that Gen-Ed kids are actually doing much more challenging work than AAP. Gen-ED teacher is phenomenal in understanding each child's weakness and strength and push them accordingly. The teacher has also helped kids overcome their weak points drastically.

Teachers make all the difference. My DC's AAP teacher this past year was awful. I mean horrible. Glad the year is ending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Believe it or not, I have a Gen-Ed kid, was in pool did not get in AAP. He has lots of friends in AAP and it is strange that Gen-Ed kids are actually doing much more challenging work than AAP. Gen-ED teacher is phenomenal in understanding each child's weakness and strength and push them accordingly. The teacher has also helped kids overcome their weak points drastically.

I totally believe it.

Contrary to what dcum would have you believe, gen ed is not a horrible punishment for bright kids who missed the pool. There are many exceptional teachers in the gen ed program, and many very bright kids as well.

I agree as well. This is what happened with my Gen Ed child and we couldn't be happier. It's just too bad the Gen Ed numbers are dwindling (at least at our center school), as more and more parents scramble to get their kids into AAP because they believe all the hype surrounding it.

[Anonymous]

We have worked with an absolutely superior general Ed teacher who ended up as a 3rd grade AAP teacher at another school (obviously a center) and I later learned she was despised by the parents, to the point where she ultimately left the center school.

Also, we have worked with a fabulous AAP center teacher that really gets my DS, and I told the principal we'd love A teacher like her for the next year.

Our oldest had a math/science teacher at the AAP center who was so bad she should just retire already.

[Anonymous]

Here's a simple difference I've seen: A lot of the kids in Gen Ed are really special but don't realize it. All of the kids in AAP have been told they're special, but only some truly are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's a simple difference I've seen: A lot of the kids in Gen Ed are really special but don't realize it. All of the kids in AAP have been told they're special, but only some truly are.

You're judging how "special" a kid is based on his/her academic ability? I place a lot of value on education and intelligence, but that is only one part of a child.

[Anonymous]

We've noticed a lot of assignments in AAP are just handed out with little background. Lessons are short and there is not a lot of repetition. One week they are reading non-fiction. The next week, they are writing poems, the next week working on vocab. The activities never repeat. It's expected the children already know what is being taught I guess. I had been of the impression that children would be doing work quicker and with some less repetition, but that they would still be building on previous tasks they've learned. We are wondering if general ed might be a better fit. Our child is advanced and is doing well, but could use more reinforcement with each task assigned.