What’s the big fuss about AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To address OPs point, I'd say that it just makes home life easier. There are sooo many little problems that are lessened, or just disappear once you segregate out the majority of troublemakers from the class. The teachers are on top of their curriculum, have more time for individual engagement with more children instead of the ones falling behind, and my child isn't being used as an indirect tutor to help the class progress. My needs for home enrichment actually decreased as DC appears to be staying engaged in class and progressing, which wasn't happening in K-2nd. Maybe it's my child's increased maturity (I doubt it), but there are less distractions and social implications to be worried about that makes for less anxiety and fights at home.

I'd say it's 100% not about the stated "advanced" nature, and the benefits are more intrinsic based on the peer group differences. I recognize it's elitist, but it's working for us.

+100 the peer group is miles above the gen ed peer group. I had one kid who got into AAP and one who didn’t. The one who didn’t unfortunately was influenced by the lack of academic rigor from gen Ed over the years - doesn’t want to/isn’t used to working hard, doesn’t know how to study for tests, doesn’t seem to care as much about school. Cares more about being popular. We notice that more of the gen Ed girls are all about clothes, make up and nails by 6th grade whereas the AAP girls are not.

AAP 6th grade teacher here. My AAP girls are ALL about brand names!!

Next thing you'll tell us is how much you are into brands yourself.

Kids are kids, some are into brands and some are into sports and some are into books and some are into math, that incudes AAP kids. There are AAP kids who are problems with regulation and there are well behaved kids in AAP. There are kids who are brand obsessed and kids who could careless in AAP. Too many people on this board want to portray AAP as this bastion of amazingly well behaved kids who are all young academics learning from each other when it is a classroom filled with a small number of gifted kids, a lot of advanced kids, and some kids who work really hard. It is probably more parental involvement that leads to kids being ahead and reasonably well behaved then anything else.

The AAP descriptions match the language immersion descriptions and there is not a selection committee for language immersion. You end up with fewer kids with serious, or even moderate, learning issues. Fewer kids with behavior issues. Mainly you end up with a classroom full of kids whose parents are involved and actively seleccting programs that they think will challenge their kid.

This. Not all of the AAP kids are super studious. In my career, I have had studious, athletes, musicians, popular kids, etc. They are kids like everyone else. They say the same lingo and watch the same stupid YouTube videos.

The point is that AAP does not have the bottom tier kids who are disrupting class with chair throwing, or taking up all the teacher's time because they can't do math from two grade levels ago. Even if there are a lot of average kids who don't exactly "deserve" to be there, not having that bottom tier makes the learning environment so much better. That's a big reason why people want AAP. It's also true in opt-in dual language programs, you're not going to have parents of bottom tier kids signing up for that either because it's too demanding for the kids at the bottom.

This is an elitist view and would be a reason to abolish the beleagured AAP program.

The non-elitist view is that we need to bring in as many illegal immigrants as possible, ignore the impact on student education because we want to be inclusive. Cater to the inclusivity at the expense of education.

[Anonymous]

Better peer group. That's the big deal. That's the only deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Better peer group. That's the big deal. That's the only deal.

I'm not even 100% sure that's true. At our center, the aap kids got cell phones younger. Definitely glad we didn't start the peer pressure on that stuff so young.
My Gen Ed kid wanted to be there, and recommends it for younger sibling....and it comes down to that the Gen Ed teachers have too many levels/groups in a classroom so the kids who are ahead just spend most of their time without much to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its about making sure your child isnt in class with chair throwers.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better peer group. That's the big deal. That's the only deal.

I'm not even 100% sure that's true. At our center, the aap kids got cell phones younger. Definitely glad we didn't start the peer pressure on that stuff so young.
My Gen Ed kid wanted to be there, and recommends it for younger sibling....and it comes down to that the Gen Ed teachers have too many levels/groups in a classroom so the kids who are ahead just spend most of their time without much to do.

This. The queen-bee mean girl types are usually bright with strong social skills and involved parents. Those kids are also getting into AAP. My DD was mocked in 2nd grade for the clothing brands she was wearing by girls who left for the AAP center the following year.

I agree that the gen ed teachers will ignore the kids who are advanced. If an advanced gen ed kid is self motivated and has reasonably high executive function, the lack of teacher attention won't matter that much. My DD spent tons of free time reading through the school library and working independently on various projects. One of the sad ironies about AAP admissions is that the kids who are above grade level but with lower GBRS/HOPE scores are the ones who likely need the structure, expectations, and prodding from AAP the most. The kids who have the high teacher ratings and thus are the most likely to be admitted into AAP are going to bloom wherever they're planted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better peer group. That's the big deal. That's the only deal.

I'm not even 100% sure that's true. At our center, the aap kids got cell phones younger. Definitely glad we didn't start the peer pressure on that stuff so young.
My Gen Ed kid wanted to be there, and recommends it for younger sibling....and it comes down to that the Gen Ed teachers have too many levels/groups in a classroom so the kids who are ahead just spend most of their time without much to do.

I'm sure it's not 100% true for everyone. It has been true in our experience so far. DC loves their classmates and doesn't miss base school kids at all which surprised me.

As for the phones, I've observed that AAP kids are trusted with more and given freedoms not normally given to GenEd kids. I wouldn't personally give DC a phone but I understand those that do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better peer group. That's the big deal. That's the only deal.

I'm not even 100% sure that's true. At our center, the aap kids got cell phones younger. Definitely glad we didn't start the peer pressure on that stuff so young.
My Gen Ed kid wanted to be there, and recommends it for younger sibling....and it comes down to that the Gen Ed teachers have too many levels/groups in a classroom so the kids who are ahead just spend most of their time without much to do.

I'm sure it's not 100% true for everyone. It has been true in our experience so far. DC loves their classmates and doesn't miss base school kids at all which surprised me.

As for the phones, I've observed that AAP kids are trusted with more and given freedoms not normally given to GenEd kids. I wouldn't personally give DC a phone but I understand those that do.

People seem to making all sorts of odd observations. Correlation is not causation.

At our school, I would say the exact opposite that the AAP kids are less into looks and fashion and not so much the kids who make tiktoks. Shrug.

My boys are also very sporty AAP kids and so are their friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better peer group. That's the big deal. That's the only deal.

I'm not even 100% sure that's true. At our center, the aap kids got cell phones younger. Definitely glad we didn't start the peer pressure on that stuff so young.
My Gen Ed kid wanted to be there, and recommends it for younger sibling....and it comes down to that the Gen Ed teachers have too many levels/groups in a classroom so the kids who are ahead just spend most of their time without much to do.

I'm sure it's not 100% true for everyone. It has been true in our experience so far. DC loves their classmates and doesn't miss base school kids at all which surprised me.

As for the phones, I've observed that AAP kids are trusted with more and given freedoms not normally given to GenEd kids. I wouldn't personally give DC a phone but I understand those that do.

People seem to making all sorts of odd observations. Correlation is not causation.

At our school, I would say the exact opposite that the AAP kids are less into looks and fashion and not so much the kids who make tiktoks. Shrug.

My boys are also very sporty AAP kids and so are their friends.

This is our school as well. AAP tends to alls have higher numbers of Asians and Indians, and their families are usually more conservative so the kids aren’t getting into some of the mainstream pop culture stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better peer group. That's the big deal. That's the only deal.

I'm not even 100% sure that's true. At our center, the aap kids got cell phones younger. Definitely glad we didn't start the peer pressure on that stuff so young.
My Gen Ed kid wanted to be there, and recommends it for younger sibling....and it comes down to that the Gen Ed teachers have too many levels/groups in a classroom so the kids who are ahead just spend most of their time without much to do.

This. The queen-bee mean girl types are usually bright with strong social skills and involved parents. Those kids are also getting into AAP. My DD was mocked in 2nd grade for the clothing brands she was wearing by girls who left for the AAP center the following year.

I agree that the gen ed teachers will ignore the kids who are advanced. If an advanced gen ed kid is self motivated and has reasonably high executive function, the lack of teacher attention won't matter that much. My DD spent tons of free time reading through the school library and working independently on various projects. One of the sad ironies about AAP admissions is that the kids who are above grade level but with lower GBRS/HOPE scores are the ones who likely need the structure, expectations, and prodding from AAP the most. The kids who have the high teacher ratings and thus are the most likely to be admitted into AAP are going to bloom wherever they're planted.

Unfortunately that is true too, but in the long run isn't that better than chair throwers and kids with Derek Zoolander level reading skills? I say pick your poison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To address OPs point, I'd say that it just makes home life easier. There are sooo many little problems that are lessened, or just disappear once you segregate out the majority of troublemakers from the class. The teachers are on top of their curriculum, have more time for individual engagement with more children instead of the ones falling behind, and my child isn't being used as an indirect tutor to help the class progress. My needs for home enrichment actually decreased as DC appears to be staying engaged in class and progressing, which wasn't happening in K-2nd. Maybe it's my child's increased maturity (I doubt it), but there are less distractions and social implications to be worried about that makes for less anxiety and fights at home.

I'd say it's 100% not about the stated "advanced" nature, and the benefits are more intrinsic based on the peer group differences. I recognize it's elitist, but it's working for us.

+100 the peer group is miles above the gen ed peer group. I had one kid who got into AAP and one who didn’t. The one who didn’t unfortunately was influenced by the lack of academic rigor from gen Ed over the years - doesn’t want to/isn’t used to working hard, doesn’t know how to study for tests, doesn’t seem to care as much about school. Cares more about being popular. We notice that more of the gen Ed girls are all about clothes, make up and nails by 6th grade whereas the AAP girls are not.

AAP 6th grade teacher here. My AAP girls are ALL about brand names!!

Next thing you'll tell us is how much you are into brands yourself.

Kids are kids, some are into brands and some are into sports and some are into books and some are into math, that incudes AAP kids. There are AAP kids who are problems with regulation and there are well behaved kids in AAP. There are kids who are brand obsessed and kids who could careless in AAP. Too many people on this board want to portray AAP as this bastion of amazingly well behaved kids who are all young academics learning from each other when it is a classroom filled with a small number of gifted kids, a lot of advanced kids, and some kids who work really hard. It is probably more parental involvement that leads to kids being ahead and reasonably well behaved then anything else.

The AAP descriptions match the language immersion descriptions and there is not a selection committee for language immersion. You end up with fewer kids with serious, or even moderate, learning issues. Fewer kids with behavior issues. Mainly you end up with a classroom full of kids whose parents are involved and actively seleccting programs that they think will challenge their kid.

This. Not all of the AAP kids are super studious. In my career, I have had studious, athletes, musicians, popular kids, etc. They are kids like everyone else. They say the same lingo and watch the same stupid YouTube videos.

The point is that AAP does not have the bottom tier kids who are disrupting class with chair throwing, or taking up all the teacher's time because they can't do math from two grade levels ago. Even if there are a lot of average kids who don't exactly "deserve" to be there, not having that bottom tier makes the learning environment so much better. That's a big reason why people want AAP. It's also true in opt-in dual language programs, you're not going to have parents of bottom tier kids signing up for that either because it's too demanding for the kids at the bottom.

“Bottom tier kids”. I hope you are a troll. I do not know one parent in my child’s AAP center that thinks of kids in terms of “tiers”- although if there was one, we certainly would not be friends with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To address OPs point, I'd say that it just makes home life easier. There are sooo many little problems that are lessened, or just disappear once you segregate out the majority of troublemakers from the class. The teachers are on top of their curriculum, have more time for individual engagement with more children instead of the ones falling behind, and my child isn't being used as an indirect tutor to help the class progress. My needs for home enrichment actually decreased as DC appears to be staying engaged in class and progressing, which wasn't happening in K-2nd. Maybe it's my child's increased maturity (I doubt it), but there are less distractions and social implications to be worried about that makes for less anxiety and fights at home.

I'd say it's 100% not about the stated "advanced" nature, and the benefits are more intrinsic based on the peer group differences. I recognize it's elitist, but it's working for us.

+100 the peer group is miles above the gen ed peer group. I had one kid who got into AAP and one who didn’t. The one who didn’t unfortunately was influenced by the lack of academic rigor from gen Ed over the years - doesn’t want to/isn’t used to working hard, doesn’t know how to study for tests, doesn’t seem to care as much about school. Cares more about being popular. We notice that more of the gen Ed girls are all about clothes, make up and nails by 6th grade whereas the AAP girls are not.

AAP 6th grade teacher here. My AAP girls are ALL about brand names!!

Next thing you'll tell us is how much you are into brands yourself.

Kids are kids, some are into brands and some are into sports and some are into books and some are into math, that incudes AAP kids. There are AAP kids who are problems with regulation and there are well behaved kids in AAP. There are kids who are brand obsessed and kids who could careless in AAP. Too many people on this board want to portray AAP as this bastion of amazingly well behaved kids who are all young academics learning from each other when it is a classroom filled with a small number of gifted kids, a lot of advanced kids, and some kids who work really hard. It is probably more parental involvement that leads to kids being ahead and reasonably well behaved then anything else.

The AAP descriptions match the language immersion descriptions and there is not a selection committee for language immersion. You end up with fewer kids with serious, or even moderate, learning issues. Fewer kids with behavior issues. Mainly you end up with a classroom full of kids whose parents are involved and actively seleccting programs that they think will challenge their kid.

This. Not all of the AAP kids are super studious. In my career, I have had studious, athletes, musicians, popular kids, etc. They are kids like everyone else. They say the same lingo and watch the same stupid YouTube videos.

The point is that AAP does not have the bottom tier kids who are disrupting class with chair throwing, or taking up all the teacher's time because they can't do math from two grade levels ago. Even if there are a lot of average kids who don't exactly "deserve" to be there, not having that bottom tier makes the learning environment so much better. That's a big reason why people want AAP. It's also true in opt-in dual language programs, you're not going to have parents of bottom tier kids signing up for that either because it's too demanding for the kids at the bottom.

“Bottom tier kids”. I hope you are a troll. I do not know one parent in my child’s AAP center that thinks of kids in terms of “tiers”- although if there was one, we certainly would not be friends with them.

No one says it out loud but everyone certainly thinks it. Except you of course, on your very high horse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To address OPs point, I'd say that it just makes home life easier. There are sooo many little problems that are lessened, or just disappear once you segregate out the majority of troublemakers from the class. The teachers are on top of their curriculum, have more time for individual engagement with more children instead of the ones falling behind, and my child isn't being used as an indirect tutor to help the class progress. My needs for home enrichment actually decreased as DC appears to be staying engaged in class and progressing, which wasn't happening in K-2nd. Maybe it's my child's increased maturity (I doubt it), but there are less distractions and social implications to be worried about that makes for less anxiety and fights at home.

I'd say it's 100% not about the stated "advanced" nature, and the benefits are more intrinsic based on the peer group differences. I recognize it's elitist, but it's working for us.

+100 the peer group is miles above the gen ed peer group. I had one kid who got into AAP and one who didn’t. The one who didn’t unfortunately was influenced by the lack of academic rigor from gen Ed over the years - doesn’t want to/isn’t used to working hard, doesn’t know how to study for tests, doesn’t seem to care as much about school. Cares more about being popular. We notice that more of the gen Ed girls are all about clothes, make up and nails by 6th grade whereas the AAP girls are not.

AAP 6th grade teacher here. My AAP girls are ALL about brand names!!

Next thing you'll tell us is how much you are into brands yourself.

Kids are kids, some are into brands and some are into sports and some are into books and some are into math, that incudes AAP kids. There are AAP kids who are problems with regulation and there are well behaved kids in AAP. There are kids who are brand obsessed and kids who could careless in AAP. Too many people on this board want to portray AAP as this bastion of amazingly well behaved kids who are all young academics learning from each other when it is a classroom filled with a small number of gifted kids, a lot of advanced kids, and some kids who work really hard. It is probably more parental involvement that leads to kids being ahead and reasonably well behaved then anything else.

The AAP descriptions match the language immersion descriptions and there is not a selection committee for language immersion. You end up with fewer kids with serious, or even moderate, learning issues. Fewer kids with behavior issues. Mainly you end up with a classroom full of kids whose parents are involved and actively seleccting programs that they think will challenge their kid.

This. Not all of the AAP kids are super studious. In my career, I have had studious, athletes, musicians, popular kids, etc. They are kids like everyone else. They say the same lingo and watch the same stupid YouTube videos.

The point is that AAP does not have the bottom tier kids who are disrupting class with chair throwing, or taking up all the teacher's time because they can't do math from two grade levels ago. Even if there are a lot of average kids who don't exactly "deserve" to be there, not having that bottom tier makes the learning environment so much better. That's a big reason why people want AAP. It's also true in opt-in dual language programs, you're not going to have parents of bottom tier kids signing up for that either because it's too demanding for the kids at the bottom.

“Bottom tier kids”. I hope you are a troll. I do not know one parent in my child’s AAP center that thinks of kids in terms of “tiers”- although if there was one, we certainly would not be friends with them.

Are you an alien who just landed on earth? Get real. I honestly cannot tell if you are trolling to rile people up or are that socially clueless. If the latter, yes, parents do mentally group their children's peers into various groups like "bad kids," "good kids," "smart kids," "dummies," "rich kids," "poor kids," "middle class kids," etc. Even the parents of "bad kids" prefer their children not be around a lot of others like them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Better peer group. That's the big deal. That's the only deal.

My child qualified for AAP and we opted out of everything except advanced math because we specifically didn't want her with the AAP peer group for four straight years (we are at a LLIV school and had no interest in the center for a number of reasons). We do plan to opt her into AAP next year in middle school where the classes are mixed up better. It's ridiculous that at LLIV schools, the kids are stuck in the exact same class for the whole time. I recognize that we could have sent our child to the center school, but we visited and talked to people with kids at that school and really didn't like it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better peer group. That's the big deal. That's the only deal.

I'm not even 100% sure that's true. At our center, the aap kids got cell phones younger. Definitely glad we didn't start the peer pressure on that stuff so young.
My Gen Ed kid wanted to be there, and recommends it for younger sibling....and it comes down to that the Gen Ed teachers have too many levels/groups in a classroom so the kids who are ahead just spend most of their time without much to do.

This. The queen-bee mean girl types are usually bright with strong social skills and involved parents. Those kids are also getting into AAP. My DD was mocked in 2nd grade for the clothing brands she was wearing by girls who left for the AAP center the following year.

I agree that the gen ed teachers will ignore the kids who are advanced. If an advanced gen ed kid is self motivated and has reasonably high executive function, the lack of teacher attention won't matter that much. My DD spent tons of free time reading through the school library and working independently on various projects. One of the sad ironies about AAP admissions is that the kids who are above grade level but with lower GBRS/HOPE scores are the ones who likely need the structure, expectations, and prodding from AAP the most. The kids who have the high teacher ratings and thus are the most likely to be admitted into AAP are going to bloom wherever they're planted.

Unfortunately that is true too, but in the long run isn't that better than chair throwers and kids with Derek Zoolander level reading skills? I say pick your poison.

I don't know where you live, but these kids do not exist at our FCPS elementary school.

[Anonymous]

I guess I just figured it out. Parents like many of you choose to live in crappy areas for the cheap housing, and then make sure your kids get into AAP for the "better peer group"