AAP - A new perspective

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why on an AAP forum are parents not able to stay on topic? This forum is not about AAP vs. gen. ed, how good the AAP program is, benefits of being at a center school for extracurriculars, whether bussing should be allowed from base schools with high AAP eligible students to centers, or how the current AAP program helps your child. There are other threads about all these things. It is about whether the AAP curriculum is appropriate for general education students in whole or part. Do your children also respond to questions in school without actually answering the actual questions too?

Yes, folks get off topic pretty quickly, especially if the question/comment is confusing or vague. The THREAD is about AAP being appropriate for GenED in raising the bar for all students and FORUM also includes all the things PP mentioned. So don't be an ass, especially if you don't "review your work before submitting." I think we can all work to raise the bar for students in this county, the separation isn't absolutely necessary.

I agree. Everyone should be taking the advanced curriculum, and those that need a slower pace should get it, but they should be doing the same material.

Honest question: Other than the "going deeper" that everyone mentions, isn't the curriculum (POS) the same for everyone? If AAP is advanced math, a third grader might get what another kid will get in fourth grade, right?

They pace it so 5th graders start the year on 6th grade math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why on an AAP forum are parents not able to stay on topic? This forum is not about AAP vs. gen. ed, how good the AAP program is, benefits of being at a center school for extracurriculars, whether bussing should be allowed from base schools with high AAP eligible students to centers, or how the current AAP program helps your child. There are other threads about all these things. It is about whether the AAP curriculum is appropriate for general education students in whole or part. Do your children also respond to questions in school without actually answering the actual questions too?

Yes, folks get off topic pretty quickly, especially if the question/comment is confusing or vague. The THREAD is about AAP being appropriate for GenED in raising the bar for all students and FORUM also includes all the things PP mentioned. So don't be an ass, especially if you don't "review your work before submitting." I think we can all work to raise the bar for students in this county, the separation isn't absolutely necessary.

I agree. Everyone should be taking the advanced curriculum, and those that need a slower pace should get it, but they should be doing the same material.

Honest question: Other than the "going deeper" that everyone mentions, isn't the curriculum (POS) the same for everyone? If AAP is advanced math, a third grader might get what another kid will get in fourth grade, right?

They pace it so 5th graders start the year on 6th grade math.

Right, but it isn't like a non AAP couldn't handle it b/c he will have to handle that math the following year.

[Anonymous]

If you aren't ready and don't have the foundation, math is just not something you can or should rush through.

I posted earlier about the differences in math SOL scores ate our center between the fifth graders taking the fifth grade math SOL and the ones taking the sixth grade math SOL.

There is a roughly 20 pt drop in fifth grade when the kids in accelerated math are removed from the scoring pool.

That is significant, and shows that the kids not in the advanced math are likely taking all the math they can handle, at a pace that they can more or less handle.

So no, 20:37, the non AAp kids who are not already taking the accelerated math absolutely cannot handle the pace of the AAP curriculum.

If they were scoring in the same upper 90% range on the fifth grade math that the AAP and advanced math kids were scoring on the 6th grade SOLs, then maaaybe you could make that argument. But that is not happening. When just those kids are scored separately they are scoring 20% lower in math than the advance math and AAP kids, and much lower than every other grade in the entire school.

Of all the parts of the AAP curriculum, the advanced math is one that should only be offered to the kids that completely show they have the skills and foundation to handle it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, you had nothing new to add. Cluster I has been using the AAP curriculum for all classes for at least one year' possibly two. The curriculum is the same. The depth and pacing is different in AAP.

Can you tell me more about this program? Is this just being implemented in Cluster I and not other clusters? Do the parents prefer the AAP curriculum for their general ed students? How do the teachers feel about it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you aren't ready and don't have the foundation, math is just not something you can or should rush through.

I posted earlier about the differences in math SOL scores ate our center between the fifth graders taking the fifth grade math SOL and the ones taking the sixth grade math SOL.

There is a roughly 20 pt drop in fifth grade when the kids in accelerated math are removed from the scoring pool.

That is significant, and shows that the kids not in the advanced math are likely taking all the math they can handle, at a pace that they can more or less handle.

So no, 20:37, the non AAp kids who are not already taking the accelerated math absolutely cannot handle the pace of the AAP curriculum.

If they were scoring in the same upper 90% range on the fifth grade math that the AAP and advanced math kids were scoring on the 6th grade SOLs, then maaaybe you could make that argument. But that is not happening. When just those kids are scored separately they are scoring 20% lower in math than the advance math and AAP kids, and much lower than every other grade in the entire school.

Of all the parts of the AAP curriculum, the advanced math is one that should only be offered to the kids that completely show they have the skills and foundation to handle it.

The problem is that the math education is generally lax until second grade and then gets suddenly accelerated from the 3rd grade for select students. If the schools had an appropriately higher pace of math education from the kindergarten days, keeping pace with the AAP math would likely not be an issue for most kids. This is also consistent with the OP's comment about raising the standard of GenEd, overall.

On a related note, if the AAP curriculum really requires the ability to accept an accelerated pace of math (and other subjects?), then why not have a test that really tests the advanced math abilities as basis for selection? Let the kids take a test on one-grade-higher math and see how they do before placing them in the accelerated program. This would be far better and relevant than tests such as NNAT and CogAT, which may or may not have any correlation to what's really required in the AAP. Indeed, this may be a better way to match kids for the AAP and reduce the rate of kids who end up in the AAP by virtue of their skills at CogAT and NNAT but find it difficult with the AAP pace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you aren't ready and don't have the foundation, math is just not something you can or should rush through.

I posted earlier about the differences in math SOL scores ate our center between the fifth graders taking the fifth grade math SOL and the ones taking the sixth grade math SOL.

There is a roughly 20 pt drop in fifth grade when the kids in accelerated math are removed from the scoring pool.

That is significant, and shows that the kids not in the advanced math are likely taking all the math they can handle, at a pace that they can more or less handle.

So no, 20:37, the non AAp kids who are not already taking the accelerated math absolutely cannot handle the pace of the AAP curriculum.

If they were scoring in the same upper 90% range on the fifth grade math that the AAP and advanced math kids were scoring on the 6th grade SOLs, then maaaybe you could make that argument. But that is not happening. When just those kids are scored separately they are scoring 20% lower in math than the advance math and AAP kids, and much lower than every other grade in the entire school.

Of all the parts of the AAP curriculum, the advanced math is one that should only be offered to the kids that completely show they have the skills and foundation to handle it.

The problem is that the math education is generally lax until second grade and then gets suddenly accelerated from the 3rd grade for select students. If the schools had an appropriately higher pace of math education from the kindergarten days, keeping pace with the AAP math would likely not be an issue for most kids. This is also consistent with the OP's comment about raising the standard of GenEd, overall.

On a related note, if the AAP curriculum really requires the ability to accept an accelerated pace of math (and other subjects?), then why not have a test that really tests the advanced math abilities as basis for selection? Let the kids take a test on one-grade-higher math and see how they do before placing them in the accelerated program. This would be far better and relevant than tests such as NNAT and CogAT, which may or may not have any correlation to what's really required in the AAP. Indeed, this may be a better way to match kids for the AAP and reduce the rate of kids who end up in the AAP by virtue of their skills at CogAT and NNAT but find it difficult with the AAP pace.

I have long advocated this suggestion. As it is right now, many AAP kids are in the program, but have great difficulty with the math. Which begs the question: why are they in a full-time center or LLIV program in the first place, if they are not uniformly "advanced"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As it is right now, many AAP kids are in the program, but have great difficulty with the math. Which begs the question: why are they in a full-time center or LLIV program in the first place, if they are not uniformly "advanced"?

Because the DCUM harpies have't voted them off the island.

[Anonymous]

I think if you look at the SOL scores as a measure of how ready they are for faster and more advanced, the AAP kids are doing fine and the placement is with a few acceptions accurate, based off math.

Their SOL scores as a group in math are in the upper 90%.

That does not show a problem with keeping up with the curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Stop bringing the discussion back to the AAP kids and focus on the general ed kids please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: focus on the general ed kids please.

Then post in the VA Public Schools forum.

[Anonymous]

On a related note, if the AAP curriculum really requires the ability to accept an accelerated pace of math (and other subjects?), then why not have a test that really tests the advanced math abilities as basis for selection? Let the kids take a test on one-grade-higher math and see how they do before placing them in the accelerated program. This would be far better and relevant than tests such as NNAT and CogAT, which may or may not have any correlation to what's really required in the AAP.

That's what base schools do to select students for compacted math which is the same as AAP math.

[Anonymous]

"Is the curriculum the same though? Do they read the same books in GE and AAP? Do they both do presentations and have socratic seminars? Do all the children use the William and Mary materials? I'm sincerely asking. One of my children may not get into AAP and I'm wondering how the curriculum differs and whether or not GE kids can handle the AAP curriculum at a slower pace. The OP said all children should be given the AAP curriculum. I'm wondering if they do this now at a slower pace or if it's an entirely different focus in general ed. Most of the posters here can't seem to stay on the topic. They write about how great it is for GE and AAP to be separate and how each child's needs are met, but they really aren't talking about whether or not the general ed kids can handle the AAP curriculum which is what the OP suggested.


The principal of our center school told us that every child in that school could do the AAP curriculum. It's not rocket science, it's the same information the GE classes get. The pace may be quicker, especially with math, but otherwise, it's nothing out of the ordinary."

I don't see how some base schools like ours would be able to offer AAP curriculum when 50-60% of children are not reading at grade level. If the class were to read a book and discuss it as they do in AAP, it would have to be a much lower leveled book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As it is right now, many AAP kids are in the program, but have great difficulty with the math. Which begs the question: why are they in a full-time center or LLIV program in the first place, if they are not uniformly "advanced"?

Because the DCUM harpies have't voted them off the island.

Guess you don't have an intelligent answer to an honest question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As it is right now, many AAP kids are in the program, but have great difficulty with the math. Which begs the question: why are they in a full-time center or LLIV program in the first place, if they are not uniformly "advanced"?

Because the DCUM harpies have't voted them off the island.

Guess you don't have an intelligent answer to an honest question.

Show me the statistics where "many" are in AAP but have "great" difficulty with the math.

That descriptor does not jive with published SOL results.

[Anonymous]

I completely agree with OP.

Every school should be implementing the Level IV curriculum across the board. This alone would make our entire school system exceptional rather than just for a subgroup of students and mediocre for the rest.

That same curriculum can be accelerated WITHIN the base school for the extremely high IQ students (this would be a much smaller number than the current AAP population) with pullouts with specialists and those that need additional support can also be given extra help WITHIN the base school via pullouts with specialists (as is already the case).

With normal pacing, every average to above-average kid will do just fine with the Level IV curriculum and this is the vast majority of FCPS.

Why are we expecting excellent curriculum for just a subset of our students, why not for the majority?

Dear Dr. Garza,
FCPS needs to wake up and see that catering to the few will in the end deteriorate our entire school system.