If you were designing the AAP program, what would you keep? Add?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the purpose of GT?

Great question! However, I'd really like to know what the purpose of AAP is (since this is no longer a gifted program) and why it isn't open to any child who can do the work, regardless of a test score.

This is an erroneous statement.

See:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/357696.page#4593122

[Anonymous]

I think AAP is a way to get around the elimination of tracking, which was done a couple of decades ago because of the political repercussions. Bottom line, I strongly believe that tracking is a necessity. Just like not everyone is equal in sports, everyone is not equal in academics. Going with that analogy, it would be ludicrous to put the super athletic on the same team as the athletically challenged, yet somehow it's ok for our kids in school. Sure, the athletic ones could coach the non-athletic ones because there are so many kids on the team and the coach is overwhelmed by the sheer number of kids on the team and consumed with the requirement to get the non-athletic up to par, but that wouldn't help the athletic ones, or even the middle of the pack ones. Just imagine what those star athletes could accomplish and develop into if they were on a team of their own?! It would benefit the league, the country and the world. I know tracking has legitimate issues, but it doesn't make any sense to get rid of it completely. We need to reinstitute tracking, with checks and balances to help minimize the negative consequesnces. We need special ed, remedial, general, honors and gifted levels in our schools! Most should fall in the middle 3 levels and there should be centers for the special ed and gifted levels because, theoretically, those should only comprise the bottom and top 5-10% of the student population. Let's stop playing these games and call AAP what it is - tracking; and then institute a proper tracking program!!!
[Report Post]

Disagree. As a teacher, I saw too many kids who were not high achievers turn into high achievers. Had these kids been labeled as "low", this would not have happened. A good teacher can challenge kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the purpose of GT?

Great question! However, I'd really like to know what the purpose of AAP is (since this is no longer a gifted program) and why it isn't open to any child who can do the work, regardless of a test score.

This is an erroneous statement.

See:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/15/357696.page#4593122

Also, Center eligibility is not based on a single test score.

See:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/690/83440.page#1354397

[Anonymous]

So, if you don't have to be all that smart, why is there any kind of cutoff? This could be ripe for classaction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, if you don't have to be all that smart, why is there any kind of cutoff? This could be ripe for classaction.

There is no cutoff.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/faqs/idfaqs.shtml

How important are the test scores in determining eligibility for full-time AAP (level IV) center placement?
Test scores are just one piece of data considered when a file is reviewed for full-time AAP (level IV) center placement. The Level IV Center Central Selection Committee, made up of FCPS teachers, specialists, and administrators, considers multiple criteria, including: the Gifted Behaviors Rating Scale (GBRS), ability and achievement test scores, work samples, student progress reports, and other optional information such as the Parent/Guardian Questionnaire (available at http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/forms.shtml).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think AAP is a way to get around the elimination of tracking, which was done a couple of decades ago because of the political repercussions. Bottom line, I strongly believe that tracking is a necessity. Just like not everyone is equal in sports, everyone is not equal in academics. Going with that analogy, it would be ludicrous to put the super athletic on the same team as the athletically challenged, yet somehow it's ok for our kids in school. Sure, the athletic ones could coach the non-athletic ones because there are so many kids on the team and the coach is overwhelmed by the sheer number of kids on the team and consumed with the requirement to get the non-athletic up to par, but that wouldn't help the athletic ones, or even the middle of the pack ones. Just imagine what those star athletes could accomplish and develop into if they were on a team of their own?! It would benefit the league, the country and the world. I know tracking has legitimate issues, but it doesn't make any sense to get rid of it completely. We need to reinstitute tracking, with checks and balances to help minimize the negative consequesnces. We need special ed, remedial, general, honors and gifted levels in our schools! Most should fall in the middle 3 levels and there should be centers for the special ed and gifted levels because, theoretically, those should only comprise the bottom and top 5-10% of the student population. Let's stop playing these games and call AAP what it is - tracking; and then institute a proper tracking program!!!
[Report Post]

Disagree. As a teacher, I saw too many kids who were not high achievers turn into high achievers. Had these kids been labeled as "low", this would not have happened. A good teacher can challenge kids.

It needs to be fluid. 2014 tracking - non discriminatory.

[Anonymous]

Disagree. As a teacher, I saw too many kids who were not high achievers turn into high achievers. Had these kids been labeled as "low", this would not have happened. A good teacher can challenge kids.


OP here. We wouldn't have to label it "low" or anything for that matter. It could be different subject-based classes for different levels. Everyone would have a non-level-specific homeroom and then, starting in 2nd or 3rd grade, the kids would go to level-specific math/language/science/social studies classes, depending on the strengths of the child. These classes would not be set in stone. They could be fluid depending on progress. There could be periodic assessments done to see if anyone needs to be placed in a different level. The kids could go to specials with their homerooms. This is the way it's done in my child's montessori school. It's so simple, and no one knows who is in what level group, and teachers are trained not to disclose or emphasize the different levels so that no one feels bad. Everyone is in the level they need to be in so that they have the best chance of developing and succeeding to their full potential, and teachers aren't forced to divert attention away from the higher achievers so they can help the lower achievers. My daughter started in what I think was a lower level group a couple of years ago and now I think she's in a higher group with children 2-3 years older than her. In actuality, I don't know if it actually is a higher level group (the older kids may just be in a lower level group), but the point is that there is no stigma because no one knows, and my daughter is progressing through the groups as her periodic assessments show she should. She's right at the level where she needs to be right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Disagree. As a teacher, I saw too many kids who were not high achievers turn into high achievers. Had these kids been labeled as "low", this would not have happened. A good teacher can challenge kids.

It's so simple, and no one knows who is in what level group, and teachers are trained not to disclose or emphasize the different levels so that no one feels bad.

And I disagree with the point that no one knows who is in what level group. My child is in second and my child knows where his/her math group stands compared to others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree. As a teacher, I saw too many kids who were not high achievers turn into high achievers. Had these kids been labeled as "low", this would not have happened. A good teacher can challenge kids.

It's so simple, and no one knows who is in what level group, and teachers are trained not to disclose or emphasize the different levels so that no one feels bad.

And I disagree with the point that no one knows who is in what level group. My child is in second and my child knows where his/her math group stands compared to others.

That is because it's a group within a class. I think it'd be harder to know if the kids left the class to go to their assigned math (or language...) class. Anyway, what difference does it make, as long as it's fluid and not labelled (low/high)? You say that's how it is now, in a differentiated classroom system. And that might be how it will be with a tracked system, but at least all of the costs and negative aspects of the AAP program will be out of the picture.

[Anonymous]

That is because it's a group within a class. I think it'd be harder to know if the kids left the class to go to their assigned math (or language...) class. Anyway, what difference does it make, as long as it's fluid and not labelled (low/high)? You say that's how it is now, in a differentiated classroom system. And that might be how it will be with a tracked system, but at least all of the costs and negative aspects of the AAP program will be out of the picture.

You cannot be serious. However, it is better if the kids are in one class where the teacher can easily shift the groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree. As a teacher, I saw too many kids who were not high achievers turn into high achievers. Had these kids been labeled as "low", this would not have happened. A good teacher can challenge kids.

It's so simple, and no one knows who is in what level group, and teachers are trained not to disclose or emphasize the different levels so that no one feels bad.

And I disagree with the point that no one knows who is in what level group. My child is in second and my child knows where his/her math group stands compared to others.

That is because it's a group within a class. I think it'd be harder to know if the kids left the class to go to their assigned math (or language...) class. Anyway, what difference does it make, as long as it's fluid and not labelled (low/high)? You say that's how it is now, in a differentiated classroom system. And that might be how it will be with a tracked system, but at least all of the costs and negative aspects of the AAP program will be out of the picture.

No one says there shouldn't be varsity sports because less talented athletes will know they aren't as good as the varsity players and make them feel bad. Everything can't be fair. It's up to the parents to teach their children that they're not necessarily going to be the best at everything and to continually seek out their talents. Everyone has their strengths. We can't let potential hurt feelings get in the way of a sound educational tracking system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That is because it's a group within a class. I think it'd be harder to know if the kids left the class to go to their assigned math (or language...) class. Anyway, what difference does it make, as long as it's fluid and not labelled (low/high)? You say that's how it is now, in a differentiated classroom system. And that might be how it will be with a tracked system, but at least all of the costs and negative aspects of the AAP program will be out of the picture.

You cannot be serious. However, it is better if the kids are in one class where the teacher can easily shift the groups.

Why can't I?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think AAP is a way to get around the elimination of tracking, which was done a couple of decades ago because of the political repercussions. Bottom line, I strongly believe that tracking is a necessity. Just like not everyone is equal in sports, everyone is not equal in academics. Going with that analogy, it would be ludicrous to put the super athletic on the same team as the athletically challenged, yet somehow it's ok for our kids in school. Sure, the athletic ones could coach the non-athletic ones because there are so many kids on the team and the coach is overwhelmed by the sheer number of kids on the team and consumed with the requirement to get the non-athletic up to par, but that wouldn't help the athletic ones, or even the middle of the pack ones. Just imagine what those star athletes could accomplish and develop into if they were on a team of their own?! It would benefit the league, the country and the world. I know tracking has legitimate issues, but it doesn't make any sense to get rid of it completely. We need to reinstitute tracking, with checks and balances to help minimize the negative consequesnces. We need special ed, remedial, general, honors and gifted levels in our schools! Most should fall in the middle 3 levels and there should be centers for the special ed and gifted levels because, theoretically, those should only comprise the bottom and top 5-10% of the student population. Let's stop playing these games and call AAP what it is - tracking; and then institute a proper tracking program!!!

Agree!!!

Agree x100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since all the AAP parents think that their kids should be separated from the average, why don't the AAP classes separate by IQ? Put the very top together, etc.

Oh no; then the parents of the AAP kids who just squeaked in would put up a fight. Wouldn't want anyone knowing their snowflakes are really just (gasp) average! Yet, it's ok for Gen Ed kids to be classified as such. Such hypocrisy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
That is because it's a group within a class. I think it'd be harder to know if the kids left the class to go to their assigned math (or language...) class. Anyway, what difference does it make, as long as it's fluid and not labelled (low/high)? You say that's how it is now, in a differentiated classroom system. And that might be how it will be with a tracked system, but at least all of the costs and negative aspects of the AAP program will be out of the picture.




You cannot be serious. However, it is better if the kids are in one class where the teacher can easily shift the groups.

Why can't I?


You seriously think the kids don't know which are the "smarter" classes. Of course, they do. They know within the class, too. This is not about "knowing" it is about flexibility.