What are the likely implications of AAP being dismantled?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

They have no capability to effect major boundary changes. Even minor changes are an ordeal now, and they are poorly planned, decided upon at the whims of self-serving School Board members, and incompetently executed. So either that will deter getting rid of centers or they’ll do it anyway and have a logistical nightmare on their hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

Raising the bar and expectations makes everyone advanced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

If everyone is advanced, then everyone is advanced silly.

[Anonymous]

As a hiring manager, I would not say everyone given the same tools want it or benefit from it. We can tell who is legit what we expect from say a program/school and taken in the experience and learning.

quote=Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

If everyone is advanced, then everyone is advanced silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

Raising the bar and expectations makes everyone advanced.

This is magical thinking.

“Expecting” a child who can’t add two digit numbers to divide decimals is not going to work.

It’s non-sensical.

Why have special education if this works? Or ESOL? Let’s just raise expectations!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

But all kids aren’t at the same level. Why would we try to force them all to be the same? Don’t we need to meet them where they are? If you take a kid without prerequisite skills and try to teach him advanced material it’s terribly unfair as well as ineffective.

This is why Algebra I in 8th for all is going to be a disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

But all kids aren’t at the same level. Why would we try to force them all to be the same? Don’t we need to meet them where they are? If you take a kid without prerequisite skills and try to teach him advanced material it’s terribly unfair as well as ineffective.

This is why Algebra I in 8th for all is going to be a disaster.

If you act like they're all the same pretty soon they'll be all the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

Another teacher here. I think the schools that have a separate Level 4 class is exactly the same as the center. The cluster model is another story. But it irritates me beyond belief that parents can choose to send their kids to a school that they believe is better when the surrounding schools offer a dedicated LL4 class. Our school averages between 12-24 center eligible kids per year. This is a middle of the road diverse school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

Another teacher here. I think the schools that have a separate Level 4 class is exactly the same as the center. The cluster model is another story. But it irritates me beyond belief that parents can choose to send their kids to a school that they believe is better when the surrounding schools offer a dedicated LL4 class. Our school averages between 12-24 center eligible kids per year. This is a middle of the road diverse school.

I think it's because in the end AAP was always just about segregation more than education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

But all kids aren’t at the same level. Why would we try to force them all to be the same? Don’t we need to meet them where they are? If you take a kid without prerequisite skills and try to teach him advanced material it’s terribly unfair as well as ineffective.

This is why Algebra I in 8th for all is going to be a disaster.

If you act like they're all the same pretty soon they'll be all the same.

Serious question: Are you or have you ever been a teacher?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

But all kids aren’t at the same level. Why would we try to force them all to be the same? Don’t we need to meet them where they are? If you take a kid without prerequisite skills and try to teach him advanced material it’s terribly unfair as well as ineffective.

This is why Algebra I in 8th for all is going to be a disaster.

They will call it Algebra I but it will be watered down and still more than many kids can handle.

But, hey, equity.