Possible AAP changes at ES

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standard in AAP isn't all that high. People need to get over it. Every kid in FCPS can and should be able to succeed in an AAP classroom. The notion that AAP is special is ridiculous. Let's stop watering down our school curriculums and push every kid towards excellence.

Every kid can't even succeed in gen ed. Come on. Let's meet kids where they are and gently push them to the upper levels of their abilities without throwing them into the deep end on their 2nd swim lesson.

They can't succeed in General Ed because it's very difficult for ONE teacher to teach effectively to a group of 30 8yr olds from all walks of life. Should the teacher have smaller class sizes and more support (sped or ESOL), I can guarantee that every student in FCPS could access the Level IV curriculum over time. The Level IV curriculum is really not all that different.

DP. Part of the point of AAP is that it's fast paced. Designed for kids who hear something once and then are ready to move on, who don't need a concept repeated and presented eight times.

Yes, the curriculum can be presented more slowly, with repetitions. But then it's gen ed and not AAP.

It's not all that fast paced.

Are you speaking from experience or assumption? I can assure you my DC's class moves at a much greater clip because the kids grasp the concepts faster.

From experience. I have two kids in FCPS. One in AAP and one not. The content does not move that much faster or go that much deeper. Math being the exception but even that, the standards are low.

Seems it varies by school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standard in AAP isn't all that high. People need to get over it. Every kid in FCPS can and should be able to succeed in an AAP classroom. The notion that AAP is special is ridiculous. Let's stop watering down our school curriculums and push every kid towards excellence.

Every kid can't even succeed in gen ed. Come on. Let's meet kids where they are and gently push them to the upper levels of their abilities without throwing them into the deep end on their 2nd swim lesson.

They can't succeed in General Ed because it's very difficult for ONE teacher to teach effectively to a group of 30 8yr olds from all walks of life. Should the teacher have smaller class sizes and more support (sped or ESOL), I can guarantee that every student in FCPS could access the Level IV curriculum over time. The Level IV curriculum is really not all that different.

DP. Part of the point of AAP is that it's fast paced. Designed for kids who hear something once and then are ready to move on, who don't need a concept repeated and presented eight times.

Yes, the curriculum can be presented more slowly, with repetitions. But then it's gen ed and not AAP.

It's not all that fast paced.

Are you speaking from experience or assumption? I can assure you my DC's class moves at a much greater clip because the kids grasp the concepts faster.

From experience. I have two kids in FCPS. One in AAP and one not. The content does not move that much faster or go that much deeper. Math being the exception but even that, the standards are low.

Seems it varies by school.

And the school being discussed here is Shrevewood--in case you missed it. But I can almost posit the same is for all other schools. The peer group is what creates the challenge. NOT THE CURRICULUM.

[Anonymous]

My older son was in GenEd at a center school. Math did move faster. Everything else seemed very, very similar. And it's teacher dependent. He got the Social Studies wonk who had won awards one year and it was much more involved than the AAP Social Studies curriculum. But also, one of the AAP teachers always let interested GenEd students participate in the science extensions if they were Level 3, like my DS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standard in AAP isn't all that high. People need to get over it. Every kid in FCPS can and should be able to succeed in an AAP classroom. The notion that AAP is special is ridiculous. Let's stop watering down our school curriculums and push every kid towards excellence.

Every kid can't even succeed in gen ed. Come on. Let's meet kids where they are and gently push them to the upper levels of their abilities without throwing them into the deep end on their 2nd swim lesson.

They can't succeed in General Ed because it's very difficult for ONE teacher to teach effectively to a group of 30 8yr olds from all walks of life. Should the teacher have smaller class sizes and more support (sped or ESOL), I can guarantee that every student in FCPS could access the Level IV curriculum over time. The Level IV curriculum is really not all that different.

DP. Part of the point of AAP is that it's fast paced. Designed for kids who hear something once and then are ready to move on, who don't need a concept repeated and presented eight times.

Yes, the curriculum can be presented more slowly, with repetitions. But then it's gen ed and not AAP.

It's not all that fast paced.

Are you speaking from experience or assumption? I can assure you my DC's class moves at a much greater clip because the kids grasp the concepts faster.

From experience. I have two kids in FCPS. One in AAP and one not. The content does not move that much faster or go that much deeper. Math being the exception but even that, the standards are low.

Seems it varies by school.

And the school being discussed here is Shrevewood--in case you missed it. But I can almost posit the same is for all other schools. The peer group is what creates the challenge. NOT THE CURRICULUM.

No, it really varies by school. Not students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standard in AAP isn't all that high. People need to get over it. Every kid in FCPS can and should be able to succeed in an AAP classroom. The notion that AAP is special is ridiculous. Let's stop watering down our school curriculums and push every kid towards excellence.

Every kid can't even succeed in gen ed. Come on. Let's meet kids where they are and gently push them to the upper levels of their abilities without throwing them into the deep end on their 2nd swim lesson.

They can't succeed in General Ed because it's very difficult for ONE teacher to teach effectively to a group of 30 8yr olds from all walks of life. Should the teacher have smaller class sizes and more support (sped or ESOL), I can guarantee that every student in FCPS could access the Level IV curriculum over time. The Level IV curriculum is really not all that different.

DP. Part of the point of AAP is that it's fast paced. Designed for kids who hear something once and then are ready to move on, who don't need a concept repeated and presented eight times.

Yes, the curriculum can be presented more slowly, with repetitions. But then it's gen ed and not AAP.

It's not all that fast paced.

Are you speaking from experience or assumption? I can assure you my DC's class moves at a much greater clip because the kids grasp the concepts faster.

From experience. I have two kids in FCPS. One in AAP and one not. The content does not move that much faster or go that much deeper. Math being the exception but even that, the standards are low.

Seems it varies by school.

Many schools have been discussed in 23 pages. In case you missed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The standard in AAP isn't all that high. People need to get over it. Every kid in FCPS can and should be able to succeed in an AAP classroom. The notion that AAP is special is ridiculous. Let's stop watering down our school curriculums and push every kid towards excellence.

Every kid can't even succeed in gen ed. Come on. Let's meet kids where they are and gently push them to the upper levels of their abilities without throwing them into the deep end on their 2nd swim lesson.

They can't succeed in General Ed because it's very difficult for ONE teacher to teach effectively to a group of 30 8yr olds from all walks of life. Should the teacher have smaller class sizes and more support (sped or ESOL), I can guarantee that every student in FCPS could access the Level IV curriculum over time. The Level IV curriculum is really not all that different.

DP. Part of the point of AAP is that it's fast paced. Designed for kids who hear something once and then are ready to move on, who don't need a concept repeated and presented eight times.

Yes, the curriculum can be presented more slowly, with repetitions. But then it's gen ed and not AAP.

It's not all that fast paced.

Are you speaking from experience or assumption? I can assure you my DC's class moves at a much greater clip because the kids grasp the concepts faster.

From experience. I have two kids in FCPS. One in AAP and one not. The content does not move that much faster or go that much deeper. Math being the exception but even that, the standards are low.

Seems it varies by school.

And the school being discussed here is Shrevewood--in case you missed it. But I can almost posit the same is for all other schools. The peer group is what creates the challenge. NOT THE CURRICULUM.

No, it really varies by school. Not students.

And the SB addresses it by changing the names of schools? lol Vote Karl Frisch out.

[Anonymous]

The biggest problem with AAP is the parents who are a-holes who raise entitled, bratty children who look down on their peers. I'm seeing it right here.

[Anonymous]

Shrevewood AAP parent here - even when it was LLIV, there was still a huge disparity in levels. A lot of DD's peers have had math and reading tutors since Kindergarten. There's a reason that even in a diverse school like ours, the vast majority of the LLIV classrooms were/are white and Indian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Received word of a meeting coming up highlighting some proposed changes to "class placement" for next year. Some of the bulleted items include:

1. Additional classroom for student receiving Level IV services (i.e. a 2nd AAP classroom)
2. Teachers 3-6th provide Level IV curriculum to ALL (yes, it was capitalized)
3. Specific differentiation to groups

the Why? Access and Opportunity to ALL students (again, capitalized)

Our school is local level IV and our child is already in AAP, so it shouldn't affect us. Just wondering if there are other ES's going the same route. I have heard from some parents that there are a multitude of kids designated as "Level III" but the AAP can't accommodate them all (the AART teacher has taken on the load), so maybe that's what's driving it?

It would be really great if they piloted an AAP for all where all kids were put into the highest AAP level in order to raise everyone up.

This would be fine if parents and school districts were willing to accept poor grades being assigned to poor performers. The reason people work to put their child in AAP is because the concerted efforts to make sure everyone passes and gets good grades has reduced the curriculums to a remedial crawl.

AAP is just normal education from 25 years ago plus advanced math. And parents who really care about their kids education put forth effort to ensure they get that education. Obviously many parents are happy with gened and those kids will turn out fine, but AAP is really a reflection of parents who just care more about kids learning as much as their kids can reasonably handle vs sitting and waiting. And thats not to be taken as an insult, just an opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Received word of a meeting coming up highlighting some proposed changes to "class placement" for next year. Some of the bulleted items include:

1. Additional classroom for student receiving Level IV services (i.e. a 2nd AAP classroom)
2. Teachers 3-6th provide Level IV curriculum to ALL (yes, it was capitalized)
3. Specific differentiation to groups

the Why? Access and Opportunity to ALL students (again, capitalized)

Our school is local level IV and our child is already in AAP, so it shouldn't affect us. Just wondering if there are other ES's going the same route. I have heard from some parents that there are a multitude of kids designated as "Level III" but the AAP can't accommodate them all (the AART teacher has taken on the load), so maybe that's what's driving it?

It would be really great if they piloted an AAP for all where all kids were put into the highest AAP level in order to raise everyone up.

This would be fine if parents and school districts were willing to accept poor grades being assigned to poor performers. The reason people work to put their child in AAP is because the concerted efforts to make sure everyone passes and gets good grades has reduced the curriculums to a remedial crawl.

AAP is just normal education from 25 years ago plus advanced math. And parents who really care about their kids education put forth effort to ensure they get that education. Obviously many parents are happy with gened and those kids will turn out fine, but AAP is really a reflection of parents who just care more about kids learning as much as their kids can reasonably handle vs sitting and waiting. And thats not to be taken as an insult, just an opinion.

Ah yes, and those kids will turn out better than fine, which makes them better people. And that is the goal. To be able to have someone to look down on for being lazy followers who don't grab life by the horns and win, win, win!

[Anonymous]

The cluster model in theory is excellent. When executed, not so much. I teach this model of level IV instruction, and it’s really hard. I have students that need accommodations for the general ed curriculum, supports for the level IV materials, and some students bored out of their minds. I have behavior issues, parents complaining about the work load and others about the watered down curriculum. I will not teach this method again.

[Anonymous]

The cluster model should never have been implemented at Shrevewood. The school is far too diverse and it is cheating everyone. I am frankly not surprised so many families are opting for Lemon Road. All that said, I do think Level IV is watered down garbage. Students need to be pushed to their fullest potential and they simply aren’t at Shrevewood. Shame really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Received word of a meeting coming up highlighting some proposed changes to "class placement" for next year. Some of the bulleted items include:

1. Additional classroom for student receiving Level IV services (i.e. a 2nd AAP classroom)
2. Teachers 3-6th provide Level IV curriculum to ALL (yes, it was capitalized)
3. Specific differentiation to groups

the Why? Access and Opportunity to ALL students (again, capitalized)

Our school is local level IV and our child is already in AAP, so it shouldn't affect us. Just wondering if there are other ES's going the same route. I have heard from some parents that there are a multitude of kids designated as "Level III" but the AAP can't accommodate them all (the AART teacher has taken on the load), so maybe that's what's driving it?

It would be really great if they piloted an AAP for all where all kids were put into the highest AAP level in order to raise everyone up.

This would be fine if parents and school districts were willing to accept poor grades being assigned to poor performers. The reason people work to put their child in AAP is because the concerted efforts to make sure everyone passes and gets good grades has reduced the curriculums to a remedial crawl.

AAP is just normal education from 25 years ago plus advanced math. And parents who really care about their kids education put forth effort to ensure they get that education. Obviously many parents are happy with gened and those kids will turn out fine, but AAP is really a reflection of parents who just care more about kids learning as much as their kids can reasonably handle vs sitting and waiting. And thats not to be taken as an insult, just an opinion.

I have one kid and AAP and one kid not in AAP and it is NO reflection of how much I care about them or their education. You implying so is offensive, just my opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The biggest problem with AAP is the parents who are a-holes who raise entitled, bratty children who look down on their peers. I'm seeing it right here.

I see the bigger problem as parents whose kids don't get in, then they become hell-bent on tearing it down. Be happy for your kid where they are and they'll be successful no matter what.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Received word of a meeting coming up highlighting some proposed changes to "class placement" for next year. Some of the bulleted items include:

1. Additional classroom for student receiving Level IV services (i.e. a 2nd AAP classroom)
2. Teachers 3-6th provide Level IV curriculum to ALL (yes, it was capitalized)
3. Specific differentiation to groups

the Why? Access and Opportunity to ALL students (again, capitalized)

Our school is local level IV and our child is already in AAP, so it shouldn't affect us. Just wondering if there are other ES's going the same route. I have heard from some parents that there are a multitude of kids designated as "Level III" but the AAP can't accommodate them all (the AART teacher has taken on the load), so maybe that's what's driving it?

It would be really great if they piloted an AAP for all where all kids were put into the highest AAP level in order to raise everyone up.

This would be fine if parents and school districts were willing to accept poor grades being assigned to poor performers. The reason people work to put their child in AAP is because the concerted efforts to make sure everyone passes and gets good grades has reduced the curriculums to a remedial crawl.

AAP is just normal education from 25 years ago plus advanced math. And parents who really care about their kids education put forth effort to ensure they get that education. Obviously many parents are happy with gened and those kids will turn out fine, but AAP is really a reflection of parents who just care more about kids learning as much as their kids can reasonably handle vs sitting and waiting. And thats not to be taken as an insult, just an opinion.

Ah yes, and those kids will turn out better than fine, which makes them better people. And that is the goal. To be able to have someone to look down on for being lazy followers who don't grab life by the horns and win, win, win!

There is no better, just different and different priorities.