why do people prefer AP schools to IB?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're two very different, but equally valuable programs. AP provides a wider variety of alacarte classes, and IB provides a comprehensive and writing-focused program.

Word on the street is that AP students get more college credits, but IB students are more prepared for college level writing.

Either program can be tailored to be heavy in either English, History, Science, or math.

AP classes are one year long
Some IB classes are one year and some are two years

IB has a bad rep in fairfax county because it was placed in the lower performing schools, however in most other areas it is a highly desired program.

Definitely don't rely on this board for info. There are several nuts who enjoy bashing each program. Do your own research and draw your own conclusion

Eight IB schools in FCPS produced a grand total of 13 NMSF this fall. The 16 AP schools, excluding TJ, had 65. With TJ, which offers AP and higher-level courses, the 17 AP schools had 210 NMSF. IB over-promises and under-delivers by every metric. It's no surprise the parents zoned for the wealthiest school districts in FCPS want to keep AP, while IB was foisted on the low-performing schools and hasn't managed to turn them around.

1. You say the same thing on every IB thread, and no one even reads it anymore
2. You clearly don't understand the impact of demographics on student performance and test scores

You are actually proving this person's point. Wealthy people don't seek out IB generally. Those IB schools are not necessarily in the worst locations in the county. They have just become the worst locations in the county because of IB.

DP here. No dog in this fight, as I'm not in FCPS and don't have a HS student yet. But I disagree entirely. Wealthy parents seek out the what they perceive to be the "strongest" environment for their kids, as do MC strivers. If you put IB into a school like McLean or Langley and allowed IB transfers, you better believe families in "lesser" zones would encourage their children to apply. Would more apply than to TJ? Probably not, but I think that has less to do with AP/IB and more to do with the fact that it's a highly rigorous test-in/application program, so of course it's always going to have the strongest students with the highest test scores (what are the requirements to transfer for IB in FCPS?). Putting an IB program into a less well-regarded school isn't necessarily going to be enough of a draw for those same parents, unless it is a test-in/elite program. That's all.

That still leaves open the question, however, as to why the parents at the wealthier schools wouldn't insist on IB if they thought it offered a superior education.

I agree IB would attract more attention if it was a selective magnet in FCPS the way it is at Richard Montgomery in Montgomery, because then it might be a brass ring. But that's the not the case in FCPS. When AP and IB are both available to all comers, the wealthy districts want to stick with AP, and the IB schools continue to lag behind.

[Anonymous]

How many students pupil place to IB programs in "equivalent" or "worse" schools (as compared to their base school)? Another one of these IB/AP debate threads noted that the transfers between Madison (AP) and Marshall (IB) were almost even. It's not a perfect comparison what with sports emphasis and marginally different SES but it suggests that there is no large demand premium for either program. This might be further extrapolated to suggest that the school SES is the primary driver of demand (e.g. Langley & McLean are more sought out than Mt. Vernon etc). And this may account for some of the vehemence of these discussions - i.e. if Langley or McLean ever offered IB, and by extension allowed for pupil placement, the demand could be overwhelming - not so much driven by preference for the specific curriculum, but for the opportunity to attend these well resourced schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's much less work, duh!

Let me elaborate on my post above.

IB is much more rigorous and teaches problem-solving.
AP crams facts and there is zero critical thinking involved. From an intellectual perspective, it's nul.
However since IB requires more work, and universities do not differentiate between the two during admissions, parents and students correctly pick the one that requires less work -
because their goal is college entrance, and not growing as thinkers.

When too much pressure to enter college is created, expect people to take shortcuts.

The schools that I have talked to do not treat AP and IB the same for admissions purposes. All of them told me IB was preferred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's much less work, duh!

Let me elaborate on my post above.

IB is much more rigorous and teaches problem-solving.
AP crams facts and there is zero critical thinking involved. From an intellectual perspective, it's nul.
However since IB requires more work, and universities do not differentiate between the two during admissions, parents and students correctly pick the one that requires less work -
because their goal is college entrance, and not growing as thinkers.

When too much pressure to enter college is created, expect people to take shortcuts.

It appears that your IB program did not teach you critical thinking.

[Anonymous]

Kids at IB schools will tell you that AP classes are much easier than IB classes.

[Anonymous]

The schools that I have talked to do not treat AP and IB the same for admissions purposes. All of them told me IB was preferred.

I'm interested - which schools did you talk with?

[Anonymous]

It's interesting to me that in Arlington people clamor for IB at Washington-Lee (even from Yorktown) and that in Falls Church City, you don't hear complaints about the IB program. People rave about it in Montgomery county too.

I don't see why it's bashed in FCPS unless the complaint is that IB programs in poor performing schools is a waste. But that still doesn't address whether it's good or bad. It just says IB programs in poor schools is not a good use of resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's much less work, duh!

Let me elaborate on my post above.

IB is much more rigorous and teaches problem-solving.
AP crams facts and there is zero critical thinking involved. From an intellectual perspective, it's nul.
However since IB requires more work, and universities do not differentiate between the two during admissions, parents and students correctly pick the one that requires less work -
because their goal is college entrance, and not growing as thinkers.

When too much pressure to enter college is created, expect people to take shortcuts.

Yes, perhaps the IB program is more rigorous--however, how many kids do the whole IB program? Not too many.
Zero critical thinking in AP? Strongly disagree with that. You are creating a myth here to support your own opinion. FWIW, that does not reflect "critical thinking". Sure, there are some who will cram facts--that goes on in IB, as well. But, you are generalizing--because there is plenty of critical thinking in AP.
Parents and students may agree that they want more balance in their kids life. They also may want some flexibility. Unless you sign on for the whole iB program, it is very difficult to participate piecemeal. Sounds like you are trying to justify your position by demeaning others.

And, yes, college entrance is a significant goal for most people. "Growing as thinkers" is quite important. You seem to think that the only way to "grow a thinker" is through IB. That is a sad opinion. I also think it is a misguided opinion.

To your last statement: When too much pressure to enter college is created, expect people to take shortcuts.



Are you seriously saying that there is no pressure in IB? That really does not support your argument. Where is your critical thinking?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids at IB schools will tell you that AP classes are much easier than IB classes.

I'm sure that makes them feel better.

IB boosters often claim that one of its advantages is that, because it's a pre-packaged curriculum, it keeps the kids from taking "too many" hard courses, which is what they assume takes place at the higher ranked AP schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting to me that in Arlington people clamor for IB at Washington-Lee (even from Yorktown) and that in Falls Church City, you don't hear complaints about the IB program. People rave about it in Montgomery county too.

I don't see why it's bashed in FCPS unless the complaint is that IB programs in poor performing schools is a waste. But that still doesn't address whether it's good or bad. It just says IB programs in poor schools is not a good use of resources.

W-L offers both AP and IB, so there are alternatives there lacking at the FCPS schools that are IB-only.

George Mason in FCC is too small to get much attention either way.

The dynamic in Montgomery is similar to in Fairfax - the top neighborhood schools are all AP (Whitman, Churchill, Wootton, and Walter Johnson), and IB is generally put in the low performing schools, apart from B-CC (similar to Robinson). The only meaningful difference is that it has one IB magnet program at Richard Montgomery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many students pupil place to IB programs in "equivalent" or "worse" schools (as compared to their base school)? Another one of these IB/AP debate threads noted that the transfers between Madison (AP) and Marshall (IB) were almost even. It's not a perfect comparison what with sports emphasis and marginally different SES but it suggests that there is no large demand premium for either program. This might be further extrapolated to suggest that the school SES is the primary driver of demand (e.g. Langley & McLean are more sought out than Mt. Vernon etc). And this may account for some of the vehemence of these discussions - i.e. if Langley or McLean ever offered IB, and by extension allowed for pupil placement, the demand could be overwhelming - not so much driven by preference for the specific curriculum, but for the opportunity to attend these well resourced schools.

You also have to know whether the schools are closed to, or cap, transfers, which is the case at a number of AP schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't understand why one is preferable to the other.... is there some major difference academically?

As PPs have noted, AP is more "a la carte" and, in FCPS at least, tends to be the college-prep curriculum in most of the top schools.

Conversely, FCPS put IB in a number of struggling schools in the late 1990s and early 2000s with the thought that it would stem white flight by creating "school-within-a-school" environments. It hasn't worked out that way - the poor schools with IB, like Lee, Mount Vernon, and Stuart, are generally considered worse than they were 15-20 years ago.

One exception to the overall trend of installing IB at the lower-ranked schools was Woodson, which FCPS tried to convert from AP to IB years ago. The parents revolted and AP was restored to the school. In addition, because of the pupil placement policies in FCPS, parents who want their kids to attend higher SES schools often can pupil place their kids out of an IB school to a nearby AP school, space permitting. As a result, schools like Lee end up losing many top students to AP schools like West Springfield and Lake Braddock.

IB has its local HQ in Bethesda, and every IB school has a dedicated "IB Coordinator" responsible for promoting IB. They monitor these threads closely, and try to convince people that IB is superior to AP. However, as the title of your thread acknowledges, most people prefer AP schools to IB. We personally have been in both and prefer the AP environment. Most of the students take plenty of AP courses, and there is no divide similar to what we found at the IB school between the IB diploma candidates and, well, everyone else.

So what this tells me is that FCPS misunderstood how to stem "white flight." It's not an argument about IB vs. AP, but rather, how do you keep the kids who prop up the test score at their zoned school, or even encourage higher-scoring kids to attend an OOB school? Answer: by giving them a highly selective program. It doesn't matter if it's AP or IB. It just matters that it's rigorous and acceptance is made difficult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids at IB schools will tell you that AP classes are much easier than IB classes.

I'm sure that makes them feel better.

IB boosters often claim that one of its advantages is that, because it's a pre-packaged curriculum, it keeps the kids from taking "too many" hard courses, which is what they assume takes place at the higher ranked AP schools.

The kids that are taking both AP and IB classes say that the AP classes are easier. Kids drop IB Diploma plans because the work load is too rigorous.

[Anonymous]

So what this tells me is that FCPS misunderstood how to stem "white flight." It's not an argument about IB vs. AP, but rather, how do you keep the kids who prop up the test score at their zoned school, or even encourage higher-scoring kids to attend an OOB school? Answer: by giving them a highly selective program. It doesn't matter if it's AP or IB. It just matters that it's rigorous and acceptance is made difficult.

And, this is what happened. It didn't attract enough people at South Lakes, so the PTA (led by the IB parents with the assistance of Stu Gibson) led a boundary change initiative. If anyone recalls, it was South Lakes PTA which objected to the original proposal because it didn't include affluent kids.

These parents are the ones who claim to be so understanding and liberal--and, yet, their kids are pretty much segregated within the school. Just like the AAP programs. The AAP programs were expanded so that more AA kids would get in--but, the result was that the program expanded so much that it is no longer what it was originally. And, the proportion of AA and Hispanic kids is no higher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't understand why one is preferable to the other.... is there some major difference academically?

I think it is legacy stigma. It used to be IB was what they brought to failing schools.