Washington Post article on FCPS' AAP report

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO, the reason we parents go out of our way and spend money on a WISC or other testing to get into AAP is because today's FCPS student population demographic is VERY different from years past. I truly enjoy all the kids in my DCs class; however, I don't think my DC will be pushed above and beyond the curriculum in a class where there is such a grave difference in educational level. I am NOT saying that my child is BETTER than anyone. My DC is smart and had the scores and the WISC to back it up. We WISC’d, as DC was not found to be eligible in the 1st round, even though the scores were in-the-pool. We WISC’d, as we know that in the AAP environment, DC is more than likely, but not guaranteed, to be pushed to go above DCs comfort zone. We have previous experience in AAP and have witnessed 1st hand certain AAP teachers going way beyond the standards – this is something that we like, very much. Not all AAP teachers teach beyond the state mandated curriculum – not many are GT endorsed, either, and both are a shame. I will also say that, perhaps, some of the Gen. Ed teachers go beyond; however, I believe that this would be a difficult task in a class where the levels educational level are so varying. Now, if FCPS were to re-implement a model similar to that of the 70s and 80s, then Gen. Ed would be an option for a lot of kids who are currently in AAP. Until then, I think most parents will push for AAP – knowing that their child has a better chance, overall, in many aspects, in an AAP class as compared to the current Gen. Ed class for the aforementioned reasons.

A better chance at what? Living a fulfilling, successful life? Nonsense! When are people around here going to clue in to the fact -- that in all but the most extreme cases, what type of program you're in in grade school DOES NOT MATTER!

I disagree and that is why we paid $375 for a WISC. That's the great thing about our country - you can always appeal a 'bad' decision, if you want. Apparently, you are OK with the Gen. Ed classroom, I am not. That's the difference. Do you ever volunteer in the classroom (k-2)? I do, and I see what goes on, I see which kids get the attention - not the ones doing their work and waiting for the others to finish - usually it's the kids who just don't get the lesson that get the attention? When there is such disparity amongst the learners, differentation at the higher level just does not happen no matter how great the teacher is.

[Anonymous]

I disagree and that is why we paid $375 for a WISC. That's the great thing about our country - you can always appeal a 'bad' decision, if you want. Apparently, you are OK with the Gen. Ed classroom, I am not. That's the difference. Do you ever volunteer in the classroom (k-2)? I do, and I see what goes on, I see which kids get the attention - not the ones doing their work and waiting for the others to finish - usually it's the kids who just don't get the lesson that get the attention? When there is such disparity amongst the learners, differentation at the higher level just does not happen no matter how great the teacher is.

And I say it clearly doesn't matter with smart kids. I had enough faith in mine who have been in both AAP and Gen Ed and they've all excelled.

And yes, I did volunteer in the classroom -- not to critique the teachers' work, but to give them a hand. Were the classes and activities always designed around maximizing the stimulation and attention that my kids received? Of course not. But that's not how the world works and the sooner they learn that lesson, the better for their education. I don't get why so many parents here feel that their kids aren't thriving unless they're being constantly challenged. That's not the way "learning" happens. Perhaps you attend a particularly bad school and maybe that's why you're not OK with Gen. Ed., but your messages smacks a bit of elitism to me.

[Anonymous]

I am in a nice cluster 8 ES school and my concern is based upon the teachers, even the good ones, having to always teach to the LCD. I am not implying that my DCs should constantly be challenged - I think that 1/2 the day being challenging would bee OK, but this is not the case in Gen. Ed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am in a nice cluster 8 ES school and my concern is based upon the teachers, even the good ones, having to always teach to the LCD. I am not implying that my DCs should constantly be challenged - I think that 1/2 the day being challenging would bee OK, but this is not the case in Gen. Ed.

It depends on the school. We had a different experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in a nice cluster 8 ES school and my concern is based upon the teachers, even the good ones, having to always teach to the LCD. I am not implying that my DCs should constantly be challenged - I think that 1/2 the day being challenging would bee OK, but this is not the case in Gen. Ed.

It depends on the school. We had a different experience.

Not our experience either. We have two children in Gen Ed and one in AAP and our experiences with Gen Ed classes have always been very positive.

On a related note, a friend of mine was telling me that when they were applying to private schools (not in Fx. Co.), one particular school told them that their philosophy is each grade learns together, in one classroom, regardless of ability. The kids who are advanced and always want to blurt the answers out have to learn to wait their turn. This teaches respect for everyone, regardless of the speed at which they learn. The administrators of the school feel this a good lesson for real life, where not everyone learns at the same pace and respecting others is key -- it's not always about who can answer the fastest or who gets their work done before everyone else. They noted that most of the kids had strengths in some areas but not in others -- even the "high achievers" -- and it was good for all of them to see that everyone excels in something. They deliberately did not separate out the advanced learners. Very refreshing mentality.