Instead of AAP, Honors classes starting in 3rd grade

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honors is open to all - it is in middle school. No math testing is needed in middle school, and it should be the same in elementary school.

VA should be more like NY. Regents and non-regents. One is harder material for those going to college. The other is more business focused for house going into technical training or non-college related fields of work.

GE is basically a wash for any high-achieving child. Any parent who has a hard-working child with smarts is going to push for AAP.

I had one child in AAP. Our second child is very bright and hard-working, but wasn't in-pool. We didn't push for AAP for this child because the whole system seems completely blown out of proportion - too many pushy parents, kids who think they're superior just because they got into AAP, and a whole lot of busy work. It would be great if Gen Ed was a more challenging curriculum, but after having one child go through AAP, we realized the AAP curriculum isn't what we had in mind (project after project isn't our idea of an "advanced curriculum"). We just decided to do a lot of supplementing at home and it's been working out great. In fact, I'd say this child has gotten a better, more focused education than the one who was in AAP.

Can you give an example of what you preferred in general ed to AAP?

Sure. We prefer less projects and more focused class work in core classes. I imagine some parents think of projects as this great extension or enrichment, but we saw if for what it was. Busy work that consumed far too much time, including weekends. Our child in Gen Ed has only had a couple of projects and they were relevant to the curriculum and nothing that we'd consider a time-waster. I think the students (and their parents) in Gen Ed are more down-to-earth and relaxed about life in general. My child in Gen Ed has learned the exact same things as the one who went through AAP, but had a much happier and less stressed time doing so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honors is open to all - it is in middle school. No math testing is needed in middle school, and it should be the same in elementary school.

VA should be more like NY. Regents and non-regents. One is harder material for those going to college. The other is more business focused for house going into technical training or non-college related fields of work.

GE is basically a wash for any high-achieving child. Any parent who has a hard-working child with smarts is going to push for AAP.

I had one child in AAP. Our second child is very bright and hard-working, but wasn't in-pool. We didn't push for AAP for this child because the whole system seems completely blown out of proportion - too many pushy parents, kids who think they're superior just because they got into AAP, and a whole lot of busy work. It would be great if Gen Ed was a more challenging curriculum, but after having one child go through AAP, we realized the AAP curriculum isn't what we had in mind (project after project isn't our idea of an "advanced curriculum"). We just decided to do a lot of supplementing at home and it's been working out great. In fact, I'd say this child has gotten a better, more focused education than the one who was in AAP.

Can you give an example of what you preferred in general ed to AAP?

Sure. We prefer less projects and more focused class work in core classes. I imagine some parents think of projects as this great extension or enrichment, but we saw if for what it was. Busy work that consumed far too much time, including weekends. Our child in Gen Ed has only had a couple of projects and they were relevant to the curriculum and nothing that we'd consider a time-waster. I think the students (and their parents) in Gen Ed are more down-to-earth and relaxed about life in general. My child in Gen Ed has learned the exact same things as the one who went through AAP, but had a much happier and less stressed time doing so.

I have to disagree...The nice things about projects is they allowed my DD to think outside the box....sometimes the results were special, other times, not so much.

Without the projects, the kids would be doing worksheets: drill and practice. That is fine until you have the child that gets it on the first problem...then they are told they are not completing the assignment? And told they are not working at there potential -- because the homework is usually incomplete...

Yes, I have seen it happen...A's on the tests, F's on the homework made me a C student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That sounds like good idea, but parents would work to put their kids in these honors classes when they have no business being in them. It can be very mentally demoralizing being in a class with students that need no to little instruction/teaching of many or all subjects. We are constantly getting emails about teen and student depression and stress here. There is more to life than academic honors classes at 9 years old and also at 17 yrs old. Having a successful life also means creating more memories as a child than academics. My child is in AAP- she has no tutor and never has had a tutor. A mother the other day could not wrap her head around how my kid has never had a tutor. She said our kids teacher never taught them math this past school year and after spending hours nightly, they went back to a tutor.

So, in the example you just gave, this mother most likely pushed her child into AAP by appealing. How is that different than offering honors classes to all? If the child is having difficulty, the obvious solution would be to move back into a "regular" class. Having open honors classes wouldn't lock anyone in to taking an advanced curriculum if they were better suited for a regular curric. - and vice versa, which is perhaps even more important.

There is no reason AAP should be black or white, either/or. A child can be advanced in several subjects, but not all and should have the opportunity to take the correct level in every subject possible. Gen Ed kids students aren't given that opportunity, except for in advanced math. There should be the option for Gen Ed students to take advanced language arts, social studies, science, etc., as needed.

Then let's not label theses classes Honors. That's where the parents will focus. How about we just have differentiated classrooms and students can be placed in whichever level fits best. And I think teachers should be the ones placing students in differentiated classrooms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honors is open to all - it is in middle school. No math testing is needed in middle school, and it should be the same in elementary school.

VA should be more like NY. Regents and non-regents. One is harder material for those going to college. The other is more business focused for house going into technical training or non-college related fields of work.

GE is basically a wash for any high-achieving child. Any parent who has a hard-working child with smarts is going to push for AAP.

I had one child in AAP. Our second child is very bright and hard-working, but wasn't in-pool. We didn't push for AAP for this child because the whole system seems completely blown out of proportion - too many pushy parents, kids who think they're superior just because they got into AAP, and a whole lot of busy work. It would be great if Gen Ed was a more challenging curriculum, but after having one child go through AAP, we realized the AAP curriculum isn't what we had in mind (project after project isn't our idea of an "advanced curriculum"). We just decided to do a lot of supplementing at home and it's been working out great. In fact, I'd say this child has gotten a better, more focused education than the one who was in AAP.

Can you give an example of what you preferred in general ed to AAP?

Sure. We prefer less projects and more focused class work in core classes. I imagine some parents think of projects as this great extension or enrichment, but we saw if for what it was. Busy work that consumed far too much time, including weekends. Our child in Gen Ed has only had a couple of projects and they were relevant to the curriculum and nothing that we'd consider a time-waster. I think the students (and their parents) in Gen Ed are more down-to-earth and relaxed about life in general. My child in Gen Ed has learned the exact same things as the one who went through AAP, but had a much happier and less stressed time doing so.

I have to disagree...The nice things about projects is they allowed my DD to think outside the box....sometimes the results were special, other times, not so much.

Without the projects, the kids would be doing worksheets: drill and practice. That is fine until you have the child that gets it on the first problem...then they are told they are not completing the assignment? And told they are not working at there potential -- because the homework is usually incomplete...

Yes, I have seen it happen...A's on the tests, F's on the homework made me a C student.

Great post, PP. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honors is open to all - it is in middle school. No math testing is needed in middle school, and it should be the same in elementary school.

VA should be more like NY. Regents and non-regents. One is harder material for those going to college. The other is more business focused for house going into technical training or non-college related fields of work.

GE is basically a wash for any high-achieving child. Any parent who has a hard-working child with smarts is going to push for AAP.

I had one child in AAP. Our second child is very bright and hard-working, but wasn't in-pool. We didn't push for AAP for this child because the whole system seems completely blown out of proportion - too many pushy parents, kids who think they're superior just because they got into AAP, and a whole lot of busy work. It would be great if Gen Ed was a more challenging curriculum, but after having one child go through AAP, we realized the AAP curriculum isn't what we had in mind (project after project isn't our idea of an "advanced curriculum"). We just decided to do a lot of supplementing at home and it's been working out great. In fact, I'd say this child has gotten a better, more focused education than the one who was in AAP.

Can you give an example of what you preferred in general ed to AAP?

Sure. We prefer less projects and more focused class work in core classes. I imagine some parents think of projects as this great extension or enrichment, but we saw if for what it was. Busy work that consumed far too much time, including weekends. Our child in Gen Ed has only had a couple of projects and they were relevant to the curriculum and nothing that we'd consider a time-waster. I think the students (and their parents) in Gen Ed are more down-to-earth and relaxed about life in general. My child in Gen Ed has learned the exact same things as the one who went through AAP, but had a much happier and less stressed time doing so.

I have to disagree...The nice things about projects is they allowed my DD to think outside the box....sometimes the results were special, other times, not so much.

Without the projects, the kids would be doing worksheets: drill and practice. That is fine until you have the child that gets it on the first problem...then they are told they are not completing the assignment? And told they are not working at there potential -- because the homework is usually incomplete...

Yes, I have seen it happen...A's on the tests, F's on the homework made me a C student.

Great post, PP. Thank you.

PP here. Thanks. The other thing is both kids will learn the same thing, but the project learning may know it better...so it appears that both understand it equally well, but one will know the scientific facts, for example, whereas the other may understand the implications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That sounds like good idea, but parents would work to put their kids in these honors classes when they have no business being in them. It can be very mentally demoralizing being in a class with students that need no to little instruction/teaching of many or all subjects. We are constantly getting emails about teen and student depression and stress here. There is more to life than academic honors classes at 9 years old and also at 17 yrs old. Having a successful life also means creating more memories as a child than academics. My child is in AAP- she has no tutor and never has had a tutor. A mother the other day could not wrap her head around how my kid has never had a tutor. She said our kids teacher never taught them math this past school year and after spending hours nightly, they went back to a tutor.

So, in the example you just gave, this mother most likely pushed her child into AAP by appealing. How is that different than offering honors classes to all? If the child is having difficulty, the obvious solution would be to move back into a "regular" class. Having open honors classes wouldn't lock anyone in to taking an advanced curriculum if they were better suited for a regular curric. - and vice versa, which is perhaps even more important.

There is no reason AAP should be black or white, either/or. A child can be advanced in several subjects, but not all and should have the opportunity to take the correct level in every subject possible. Gen Ed kids students aren't given that opportunity, except for in advanced math. There should be the option for Gen Ed students to take advanced language arts, social studies, science, etc., as needed.

Then let's not label theses classes Honors. That's where the parents will focus. How about we just have differentiated classrooms and students can be placed in whichever level fits best. And I think teachers should be the ones placing students in differentiated classrooms.

I'm the PP and I would be just fine with that solution. Getting rid of the labeling would go a long way in revamping this system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That sounds like good idea, but parents would work to put their kids in these honors classes when they have no business being in them. It can be very mentally demoralizing being in a class with students that need no to little instruction/teaching of many or all subjects. We are constantly getting emails about teen and student depression and stress here. There is more to life than academic honors classes at 9 years old and also at 17 yrs old. Having a successful life also means creating more memories as a child than academics. My child is in AAP- she has no tutor and never has had a tutor. A mother the other day could not wrap her head around how my kid has never had a tutor. She said our kids teacher never taught them math this past school year and after spending hours nightly, they went back to a tutor.

So, in the example you just gave, this mother most likely pushed her child into AAP by appealing. How is that different than offering honors classes to all? If the child is having difficulty, the obvious solution would be to move back into a "regular" class. Having open honors classes wouldn't lock anyone in to taking an advanced curriculum if they were better suited for a regular curric. - and vice versa, which is perhaps even more important.

There is no reason AAP should be black or white, either/or. A child can be advanced in several subjects, but not all and should have the opportunity to take the correct level in every subject possible. Gen Ed kids students aren't given that opportunity, except for in advanced math. There should be the option for Gen Ed students to take advanced language arts, social studies, science, etc., as needed.

Then let's not label theses classes Honors. That's where the parents will focus. How about we just have differentiated classrooms and students can be placed in whichever level fits best. And I think teachers should be the ones placing students in differentiated classrooms.

I'm the PP and I would be just fine with that solution. Getting rid of the labeling would go a long way in revamping this system.

So then the labeling would be based on the teacher's name -- Mrs. Smith has the smart kids and Mr. Jones has the not-so-smart ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That sounds like good idea, but parents would work to put their kids in these honors classes when they have no business being in them. It can be very mentally demoralizing being in a class with students that need no to little instruction/teaching of many or all subjects. We are constantly getting emails about teen and student depression and stress here. There is more to life than academic honors classes at 9 years old and also at 17 yrs old. Having a successful life also means creating more memories as a child than academics. My child is in AAP- she has no tutor and never has had a tutor. A mother the other day could not wrap her head around how my kid has never had a tutor. She said our kids teacher never taught them math this past school year and after spending hours nightly, they went back to a tutor.

So, in the example you just gave, this mother most likely pushed her child into AAP by appealing. How is that different than offering honors classes to all? If the child is having difficulty, the obvious solution would be to move back into a "regular" class. Having open honors classes wouldn't lock anyone in to taking an advanced curriculum if they were better suited for a regular curric. - and vice versa, which is perhaps even more important.

There is no reason AAP should be black or white, either/or. A child can be advanced in several subjects, but not all and should have the opportunity to take the correct level in every subject possible. Gen Ed kids students aren't given that opportunity, except for in advanced math. There should be the option for Gen Ed students to take advanced language arts, social studies, science, etc., as needed.

Then let's not label theses classes Honors. That's where the parents will focus. How about we just have differentiated classrooms and students can be placed in whichever level fits best. And I think teachers should be the ones placing students in differentiated classrooms.

I'm the PP and I would be just fine with that solution. Getting rid of the labeling would go a long way in revamping this system.

So then the labeling would be based on the teacher's name -- Mrs. Smith has the smart kids and Mr. Jones has the not-so-smart ones.

If you remove the parent placement it doesn't matter. A student is theoretically placed in the class to suit his abilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That sounds like good idea, but parents would work to put their kids in these honors classes when they have no business being in them. It can be very mentally demoralizing being in a class with students that need no to little instruction/teaching of many or all subjects. We are constantly getting emails about teen and student depression and stress here. There is more to life than academic honors classes at 9 years old and also at 17 yrs old. Having a successful life also means creating more memories as a child than academics. My child is in AAP- she has no tutor and never has had a tutor. A mother the other day could not wrap her head around how my kid has never had a tutor. She said our kids teacher never taught them math this past school year and after spending hours nightly, they went back to a tutor.

So, in the example you just gave, this mother most likely pushed her child into AAP by appealing. How is that different than offering honors classes to all? If the child is having difficulty, the obvious solution would be to move back into a "regular" class. Having open honors classes wouldn't lock anyone in to taking an advanced curriculum if they were better suited for a regular curric. - and vice versa, which is perhaps even more important.

There is no reason AAP should be black or white, either/or. A child can be advanced in several subjects, but not all and should have the opportunity to take the correct level in every subject possible. Gen Ed kids students aren't given that opportunity, except for in advanced math. There should be the option for Gen Ed students to take advanced language arts, social studies, science, etc., as needed.

Then let's not label theses classes Honors. That's where the parents will focus. How about we just have differentiated classrooms and students can be placed in whichever level fits best. And I think teachers should be the ones placing students in differentiated classrooms.

I'm the PP and I would be just fine with that solution. Getting rid of the labeling would go a long way in revamping this system.

So then the labeling would be based on the teacher's name -- Mrs. Smith has the smart kids and Mr. Jones has the not-so-smart ones.

If you remove the parent placement it doesn't matter. A student is theoretically placed in the class to suit his abilities.

So wouldn't it just be a lot easier to remove parent placement from the current system? Ta Da! It's done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That sounds like good idea, but parents would work to put their kids in these honors classes when they have no business being in them. It can be very mentally demoralizing being in a class with students that need no to little instruction/teaching of many or all subjects. We are constantly getting emails about teen and student depression and stress here. There is more to life than academic honors classes at 9 years old and also at 17 yrs old. Having a successful life also means creating more memories as a child than academics. My child is in AAP- she has no tutor and never has had a tutor. A mother the other day could not wrap her head around how my kid has never had a tutor. She said our kids teacher never taught them math this past school year and after spending hours nightly, they went back to a tutor.

So, in the example you just gave, this mother most likely pushed her child into AAP by appealing. How is that different than offering honors classes to all? If the child is having difficulty, the obvious solution would be to move back into a "regular" class. Having open honors classes wouldn't lock anyone in to taking an advanced curriculum if they were better suited for a regular curric. - and vice versa, which is perhaps even more important.

There is no reason AAP should be black or white, either/or. A child can be advanced in several subjects, but not all and should have the opportunity to take the correct level in every subject possible. Gen Ed kids students aren't given that opportunity, except for in advanced math. There should be the option for Gen Ed students to take advanced language arts, social studies, science, etc., as needed.

Then let's not label theses classes Honors. That's where the parents will focus. How about we just have differentiated classrooms and students can be placed in whichever level fits best. And I think teachers should be the ones placing students in differentiated classrooms.

I'm the PP and I would be just fine with that solution. Getting rid of the labeling would go a long way in revamping this system.

So then the labeling would be based on the teacher's name -- Mrs. Smith has the smart kids and Mr. Jones has the not-so-smart ones.

If you remove the parent placement it doesn't matter. A student is theoretically placed in the class to suit his abilities.

So wouldn't it just be a lot easier to remove parent placement from the current system? Ta Da! It's done.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That sounds like good idea, but parents would work to put their kids in these honors classes when they have no business being in them. It can be very mentally demoralizing being in a class with students that need no to little instruction/teaching of many or all subjects. We are constantly getting emails about teen and student depression and stress here. There is more to life than academic honors classes at 9 years old and also at 17 yrs old. Having a successful life also means creating more memories as a child than academics. My child is in AAP- she has no tutor and never has had a tutor. A mother the other day could not wrap her head around how my kid has never had a tutor. She said our kids teacher never taught them math this past school year and after spending hours nightly, they went back to a tutor.

So, in the example you just gave, this mother most likely pushed her child into AAP by appealing. How is that different than offering honors classes to all? If the child is having difficulty, the obvious solution would be to move back into a "regular" class. Having open honors classes wouldn't lock anyone in to taking an advanced curriculum if they were better suited for a regular curric. - and vice versa, which is perhaps even more important.

There is no reason AAP should be black or white, either/or. A child can be advanced in several subjects, but not all and should have the opportunity to take the correct level in every subject possible. Gen Ed kids students aren't given that opportunity, except for in advanced math. There should be the option for Gen Ed students to take advanced language arts, social studies, science, etc., as needed.

Then let's not label theses classes Honors. That's where the parents will focus. How about we just have differentiated classrooms and students can be placed in whichever level fits best. And I think teachers should be the ones placing students in differentiated classrooms.

I'm the PP and I would be just fine with that solution. Getting rid of the labeling would go a long way in revamping this system.

So then the labeling would be based on the teacher's name -- Mrs. Smith has the smart kids and Mr. Jones has the not-so-smart ones.

If you remove the parent placement it doesn't matter. A student is theoretically placed in the class to suit his abilities.

So wouldn't it just be a lot easier to remove parent placement from the current system? Ta Da! It's done.

Well, I think a parent could request a review of a student's case but that the portfolio put together by the school is what really counts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That sounds like good idea, but parents would work to put their kids in these honors classes when they have no business being in them. It can be very mentally demoralizing being in a class with students that need no to little instruction/teaching of many or all subjects. We are constantly getting emails about teen and student depression and stress here. There is more to life than academic honors classes at 9 years old and also at 17 yrs old. Having a successful life also means creating more memories as a child than academics. My child is in AAP- she has no tutor and never has had a tutor. A mother the other day could not wrap her head around how my kid has never had a tutor. She said our kids teacher never taught them math this past school year and after spending hours nightly, they went back to a tutor.

So, in the example you just gave, this mother most likely pushed her child into AAP by appealing. How is that different than offering honors classes to all? If the child is having difficulty, the obvious solution would be to move back into a "regular" class. Having open honors classes wouldn't lock anyone in to taking an advanced curriculum if they were better suited for a regular curric. - and vice versa, which is perhaps even more important.

There is no reason AAP should be black or white, either/or. A child can be advanced in several subjects, but not all and should have the opportunity to take the correct level in every subject possible. Gen Ed kids students aren't given that opportunity, except for in advanced math. There should be the option for Gen Ed students to take advanced language arts, social studies, science, etc., as needed.

Then let's not label theses classes Honors. That's where the parents will focus. How about we just have differentiated classrooms and students can be placed in whichever level fits best. And I think teachers should be the ones placing students in differentiated classrooms.

I'm the PP and I would be just fine with that solution. Getting rid of the labeling would go a long way in revamping this system.

So then the labeling would be based on the teacher's name -- Mrs. Smith has the smart kids and Mr. Jones has the not-so-smart ones.

If you remove the parent placement it doesn't matter. A student is theoretically placed in the class to suit his abilities.

So wouldn't it just be a lot easier to remove parent placement from the current system? Ta Da! It's done.

I do not believe that parents can place a kid into AAP; they can refer, and they can appeal, but not place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That sounds like good idea, but parents would work to put their kids in these honors classes when they have no business being in them. It can be very mentally demoralizing being in a class with students that need no to little instruction/teaching of many or all subjects. We are constantly getting emails about teen and student depression and stress here. There is more to life than academic honors classes at 9 years old and also at 17 yrs old. Having a successful life also means creating more memories as a child than academics. My child is in AAP- she has no tutor and never has had a tutor. A mother the other day could not wrap her head around how my kid has never had a tutor. She said our kids teacher never taught them math this past school year and after spending hours nightly, they went back to a tutor.

So, in the example you just gave, this mother most likely pushed her child into AAP by appealing. How is that different than offering honors classes to all? If the child is having difficulty, the obvious solution would be to move back into a "regular" class. Having open honors classes wouldn't lock anyone in to taking an advanced curriculum if they were better suited for a regular curric. - and vice versa, which is perhaps even more important.

There is no reason AAP should be black or white, either/or. A child can be advanced in several subjects, but not all and should have the opportunity to take the correct level in every subject possible. Gen Ed kids students aren't given that opportunity, except for in advanced math. There should be the option for Gen Ed students to take advanced language arts, social studies, science, etc., as needed.

Then let's not label theses classes Honors. That's where the parents will focus. How about we just have differentiated classrooms and students can be placed in whichever level fits best. And I think teachers should be the ones placing students in differentiated classrooms.

I'm the PP and I would be just fine with that solution. Getting rid of the labeling would go a long way in revamping this system.

So then the labeling would be based on the teacher's name -- Mrs. Smith has the smart kids and Mr. Jones has the not-so-smart ones.

If you remove the parent placement it doesn't matter. A student is theoretically placed in the class to suit his abilities.

So wouldn't it just be a lot easier to remove parent placement from the current system? Ta Da! It's done.

I do not believe that parents can place a kid into AAP; they can refer, and they can appeal, but not place.

+1

A parent can place a student in honors classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honors is open to all - it is in middle school. No math testing is needed in middle school, and it should be the same in elementary school.

VA should be more like NY. Regents and non-regents. One is harder material for those going to college. The other is more business focused for house going into technical training or non-college related fields of work.

GE is basically a wash for any high-achieving child. Any parent who has a hard-working child with smarts is going to push for AAP.

I had one child in AAP. Our second child is very bright and hard-working, but wasn't in-pool. We didn't push for AAP for this child because the whole system seems completely blown out of proportion - too many pushy parents, kids who think they're superior just because they got into AAP, and a whole lot of busy work. It would be great if Gen Ed was a more challenging curriculum, but after having one child go through AAP, we realized the AAP curriculum isn't what we had in mind (project after project isn't our idea of an "advanced curriculum"). We just decided to do a lot of supplementing at home and it's been working out great. In fact, I'd say this child has gotten a better, more focused education than the one who was in AAP.

Can you give an example of what you preferred in general ed to AAP?

Sure. We prefer less projects and more focused class work in core classes. I imagine some parents think of projects as this great extension or enrichment, but we saw if for what it was. Busy work that consumed far too much time, including weekends. Our child in Gen Ed has only had a couple of projects and they were relevant to the curriculum and nothing that we'd consider a time-waster. I think the students (and their parents) in Gen Ed are more down-to-earth and relaxed about life in general. My child in Gen Ed has learned the exact same things as the one who went through AAP, but had a much happier and less stressed time doing so.

I have to disagree...The nice things about projects is they allowed my DD to think outside the box....sometimes the results were special, other times, not so much.

Without the projects, the kids would be doing worksheets: drill and practice. That is fine until you have the child that gets it on the first problem...then they are told they are not completing the assignment? And told they are not working at there potential -- because the homework is usually incomplete...

Yes, I have seen it happen...A's on the tests, F's on the homework made me a C student.

Great post, PP. Thank you.

PP here. Thanks. The other thing is both kids will learn the same thing, but the project learning may know it better...so it appears that both understand it equally well, but one will know the scientific facts, for example, whereas the other may understand the implications.

again the effectiveness of this "Project learning" totally depends on school and the team of teachers at each grade level. How well the teach, help direct/guide/lead the kids together. I've heard striking differences between centers from friends as well as centers that mix the two programs together for projects.