The entire AAP program should be eliminated

[Anonymous]

I have really mixed feelings about this. I was in the G&T program as a child and it was a really important and valuable experience for me. My family was working class and I received no real support for academics at home. But I was very academically inclined (loved school, early reader, super engaged in class, and yes, tested well). The G&T program offered me access to all kinds of things my parents would never have been able to afford or even thought to introduce me to. I'm really grateful for those experiences and in my case, G&T worked in favor of equity because it introduced me to other opportunities and interests that otherwise I wouldn't have known about.

I should also note I'm white and from a very white area with little diversity. There was plenty of economic diversity in our G&T program (my two best friends in grade school were in it with me, were both on government assistance, and one had a single mom and absentee father -- they really did base admission to the G&T program on interest and merit and people didn't just buy their way in). So the idea of a G&T program being anti-equity was really foreign to me.

But now living in this area, I see how absolutely obsessive and privileged so many people are, and the way they will stop at nothing to give their kids every possible academic advantage. I don't know what the answer is, but I know AAP programs here do not function like the G&T program I grew up with. I do think there are real equity problems now and I don't know the answer. My kid is still young (PK age) but is a lot like I was at that age -- early reader, very interested in school, love learning. I could see her thriving in an AAP program, and I could also see her getting frustrated and bored without one. But I also don't want to work to get her into AAP just so she can spend all her time around smart but very intense kids with wealthy and even more intense parents who are all just obsessively focused on getting into TJ and going to Ivies and making a lot of money. Even if she also got access to great learning opportunities, I don't know if that's worth it. We are not wealthy and I value diversity.

I think something has to be done and it would make me sad if the only option is "no more AAP". But what are the other options? I am skeptical about the idea that most teachers can adequately teach to different levels. I'm sure some talented folks can, but we're talking about the average teacher.

Anyway, this feels like something rich, hyper-competitive white people ruined for everyone else and I'm frustrated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People that claim you can do differentiation in a heterogeneous class have no clue. My son needs differentiation, there’s absolutely nothing he learns in his third grade math. The “ differentiation” looks like this: the class does 16:4, while the teaches gives my son the exercise 2516:4, which he does in his head in 5 seconds.

True differentiation wound require different content, lesson plan, homework, concepts. Most school districts and teachers are not capable to provide true in depth alternatives so it easier and cheaper to group students together by some ability metric and move them together through the regular curriculum faster.

Not ideal, but better than wasting the student potential with worksheets that provide no learning or to simply ignore bright students during class.

Except everywhere in the country does it this way and the kids deal. You feel entitled to something that is actually incredibly indulgent of advanced kids and is at the cost of everyone else.

DP. The program was here when we moved here. We didn’t create it. I do think there can be changes but I don’t think there’s any reason the existence of the AAP class harms the gen ed class. They can have good teachers in gen ed too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People that claim you can do differentiation in a heterogeneous class have no clue. My son needs differentiation, there’s absolutely nothing he learns in his third grade math. The “ differentiation” looks like this: the class does 16:4, while the teaches gives my son the exercise 2516:4, which he does in his head in 5 seconds.

True differentiation wound require different content, lesson plan, homework, concepts. Most school districts and teachers are not capable to provide true in depth alternatives so it easier and cheaper to group students together by some ability metric and move them together through the regular curriculum faster.

Not ideal, but better than wasting the student potential with worksheets that provide no learning or to simply ignore bright students during class.

Except everywhere in the country does it this way and the kids deal. You feel entitled to something that is actually incredibly indulgent of advanced kids and is at the cost of everyone else.

There are GT programs all over the country, dear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. The 99.9% kids who would truly need a more specialized and segregated education are not served by AAP. They are just as bored in AAP as they would be in general Ed.

2. The top 20% AAP generally serves well would do just as well in general Ed if AAP did not exist, in which case enrichment and groupings within general Ed could possibly serve even more students.

Are you speaking from experience? Because I've got a #1 and a #2 and both of them are in SAP and are not bored or ill served.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People that claim you can do differentiation in a heterogeneous class have no clue. My son needs differentiation, there’s absolutely nothing he learns in his third grade math. The “ differentiation” looks like this: the class does 16:4, while the teaches gives my son the exercise 2516:4, which he does in his head in 5 seconds.

True differentiation wound require different content, lesson plan, homework, concepts. Most school districts and teachers are not capable to provide true in depth alternatives so it easier and cheaper to group students together by some ability metric and move them together through the regular curriculum faster.

Not ideal, but better than wasting the student potential with worksheets that provide no learning or to simply ignore bright students during class.

Except everywhere in the country does it this way and the kids deal. You feel entitled to something that is actually incredibly indulgent of advanced kids and is at the cost of everyone else.

Why is it indulgent to want a good education for my child, an education that I fund through my taxes? Why am I being asked to raise my own takes for more school funding if the system can't educate my own? Why is it that if I want quality education I have to look outside the public school system?

If what I want is indulgent I propose to not only do away with the advanced tracking system, but do away with the public school system. A voucher for every child that parents can spend to any school the seem fit. I'll vote for this in a heart beat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have really mixed feelings about this. I was in the G&T program as a child and it was a really important and valuable experience for me. My family was working class and I received no real support for academics at home. But I was very academically inclined (loved school, early reader, super engaged in class, and yes, tested well). The G&T program offered me access to all kinds of things my parents would never have been able to afford or even thought to introduce me to. I'm really grateful for those experiences and in my case, G&T worked in favor of equity because it introduced me to other opportunities and interests that otherwise I wouldn't have known about.

I should also note I'm white and from a very white area with little diversity. There was plenty of economic diversity in our G&T program (my two best friends in grade school were in it with me, were both on government assistance, and one had a single mom and absentee father -- they really did base admission to the G&T program on interest and merit and people didn't just buy their way in). So the idea of a G&T program being anti-equity was really foreign to me.

But now living in this area, I see how absolutely obsessive and privileged so many people are, and the way they will stop at nothing to give their kids every possible academic advantage. I don't know what the answer is, but I know AAP programs here do not function like the G&T program I grew up with. I do think there are real equity problems now and I don't know the answer. My kid is still young (PK age) but is a lot like I was at that age -- early reader, very interested in school, love learning. I could see her thriving in an AAP program, and I could also see her getting frustrated and bored without one. But I also don't want to work to get her into AAP just so she can spend all her time around smart but very intense kids with wealthy and even more intense parents who are all just obsessively focused on getting into TJ and going to Ivies and making a lot of money. Even if she also got access to great learning opportunities, I don't know if that's worth it. We are not wealthy and I value diversity.

I think something has to be done and it would make me sad if the only option is "no more AAP". But what are the other options? I am skeptical about the idea that most teachers can adequately teach to different levels. I'm sure some talented folks can, but we're talking about the average teacher.

Anyway, this feels like something rich, hyper-competitive white people ruined for everyone else and I'm frustrated.

Are you basing this post off of what you read on this forum? Or your actual neighborhood?

DCUM is not real. And you can move, if you need to. There's nothing wrong with AAP, despite what the Maryland poster thinks. It's not bad or useless or immoral.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have really mixed feelings about this. I was in the G&T program as a child and it was a really important and valuable experience for me. My family was working class and I received no real support for academics at home. But I was very academically inclined (loved school, early reader, super engaged in class, and yes, tested well). The G&T program offered me access to all kinds of things my parents would never have been able to afford or even thought to introduce me to. I'm really grateful for those experiences and in my case, G&T worked in favor of equity because it introduced me to other opportunities and interests that otherwise I wouldn't have known about.

I should also note I'm white and from a very white area with little diversity. There was plenty of economic diversity in our G&T program (my two best friends in grade school were in it with me, were both on government assistance, and one had a single mom and absentee father -- they really did base admission to the G&T program on interest and merit and people didn't just buy their way in). So the idea of a G&T program being anti-equity was really foreign to me.

But now living in this area, I see how absolutely obsessive and privileged so many people are, and the way they will stop at nothing to give their kids every possible academic advantage. I don't know what the answer is, but I know AAP programs here do not function like the G&T program I grew up with. I do think there are real equity problems now and I don't know the answer. My kid is still young (PK age) but is a lot like I was at that age -- early reader, very interested in school, love learning. I could see her thriving in an AAP program, and I could also see her getting frustrated and bored without one. But I also don't want to work to get her into AAP just so she can spend all her time around smart but very intense kids with wealthy and even more intense parents who are all just obsessively focused on getting into TJ and going to Ivies and making a lot of money. Even if she also got access to great learning opportunities, I don't know if that's worth it. We are not wealthy and I value diversity.

I think something has to be done and it would make me sad if the only option is "no more AAP". But what are the other options? I am skeptical about the idea that most teachers can adequately teach to different levels. I'm sure some talented folks can, but we're talking about the average teacher.

Anyway, this feels like something rich, hyper-competitive white people ruined for everyone else and I'm frustrated.

Where the parent often fits in is parent referral and appeals. To improve - I think somehow I think they can instruct teachers to refer more students (including or especially URMs and/or FARMs students) and for students in those categories they can also perhaps automatically appeal students in those categories and perhaps solicit more teacher feedback / work for those students for the appeal.

People think it's easier to blame rich white people - rather than try to think outside the box a little bit to solve the problem. I don't even think what I am suggesting is that hard to implement.

[Anonymous]

I don't know how you "fix" AAP to truly serve all the children both academically and socially. There is a definite need for sadvanced academics at all levels without the issues of creating two separate groups of students. I think the program is "broken."

I have 3 children and our base elementary school is a center school. My oldest is now a college senior and my youngest in high school. So I've been away from elementary school AAP for a couple of years. But I saw first hand what it was like to have both an AAP kid and a Gen Ed kid in a center school. I had one who qualified for AAP and two who did not. While my children were in elementary school, I HATED the segregation. The children knew who was in what class. There were alot of "smart kids" "dumb kids" remarks. My DS who was in the AAP class would come home in tears because he would get teased in PE class or on the playground by the GE kids (oh we don't want to play with you - you think you're so smart.) My Gen Ed kid would come home in tears because he was "stupid" and couldn't be in class with his "smart" friends.

Then the kids all get to high school and they get to choose whether they take the Honors, AP, IB or regular classes. Students/families get to self select if they want to be in advanced level classes in high school but they can't do that in elementary school. Instead, they create two classes of students.

Yes, I realize when you're learning to read or add and subtract, its easier to group children who are at the same level together. You want to challenge each child appropriately, whether that's at an advanced level or the child who needs more time/slower pace at the lower level. But there has to be a better way than what is currently being done.

[Anonymous]

The problem is not AAP. It is Gen Ed and how it is structured. Having taught both, I can tell you it is a night/day experience. Parents know this and want better for their kids so they fight tooth and nail to get into AAP. The Gen Ed program needs revamping. How we deal with ESOL and SPED needs revamping as well. I personally believe should be self contained offerings in ES. In middle school ESOL level 1-3 have ESOL classes in all core subject areas. Kids in ES are lucky to meet for 15 mins with a teacher. The rest often falls on teacher. SPED students should be able to be in class if it is the least restrictive environment but sometimes it is not, but parents can choose to avoid self contained placement. It is really hard for a kid with severe behavior to be removed from GenEd and into a different placement or school. We have this every year at my school. S child that is so disruptive to the learning of others, but literally there is nothing that can be done. That isn’t fair to everyone else. This is what parents need to fight for. Heck, I would be happy with 1 ESOL and Sped teacger per grade for full day support!

[Anonymous]

One problem is that some elementary schools don't even offer advanced math until 5th grade. When my mathy kid was accepted to AAP - the choice was - send him to the center where he could get advanced math starting in 3rd grade or keep him at base where he couldn't get it until 5th.

NOW my base school's great schools rating is lower because it loses all of its AAP kids to the center - and I did hear my base is now going to offer Local Level IV now starting next year. I think if more schools have more local offerings fewer people would leave for the center - at least in my area.

[Anonymous]

The true question is how does the public school system teaches kids that are in the top 10-20% of intellectual ability? We have no issue providing differentiated schooling for the bottom 10% through special education/learning disability programs, but somehow for some people doing the same for the top students seems unfair.

What is being proposed? One option is to let them stay in a regular class, and the teacher will figure it out. Few people would be ok with the same approach for special Ed.

The reality is that good education is personalized and tailored to the student needs, abilities, strengths and weaknesses. You simply can’t do that in the conveyor belt education system that is same for all from k to 12. So we need to figure out how to do this in a way that benefits society the most.

Grouping by ability (and I realize that it’s not always the case) really works, ands school districts that went into the opposite direction of detracting are a complete disaster, see all stories about SF schools, where you can only take a different track in junior year of high school. The district lost 50% of white student enrollment in kindergarten this year.

[Anonymous]

PP is right. Parents try to escape general ed. No one wants to say why. Its just easier to pull down AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It should be changed so it's not pay to play anymore where the elitist moms of not so special kids can buy their way in bringing the teacher cupcakes, test prep courses, appeals, principal placement, etc. It's all very unfair to other kids who deserve those spots but don't have mammies working the system.

I think the solution is leveled classes based on ability year to year. If you can't keep up, you drop down a level. If it's too easy, you move up. Without having to obtain admission to an elitist program.

Or segregated program. Because that's what it is. It segregates those kids from the rest of their cohort.

And it furthers income inequality.

We don’t need qualified engineers, we need everyone on the same level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP is right. Parents try to escape general ed. No one wants to say why. Its just easier to pull down AAP.

It's all in the labeling. "Gen Ed" equates average, nothing special. AAP is fancy.

[Anonymous]

The biggest problem with AAP is that it's all or nothing across all subjects. This means that some portion of AAP kids will be on or below grade level in either math or reading, and will then slow down the AAP class for everyone else.

Kids who are on or below grade level should be in gen ed and not AAP for that subject.

Kids who are around 1 year above grade level could be well served in a LLIV type setup.

Quite possibly, kids who are 2 grade levels ahead could receive differentiation for that within the LLIV classroom.

LLIV for most would mean that some group of kids would be in AAP for math & science, but gen ed for language arts & history or vice versa. That would be ideal, since their needs would most appropriately be met that way. Currently, kids like that either get into AAP and slow down the class in their area of weakness, or they are excluded from AAP and do not receive the advanced instruction in their area of strength.

The very few kids who are more than 2 grade levels ahead should be eligible for a real GT program in a center.