Rethinking AAP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We went to the Open House yesterday. DS teacher called out three days that are used for CogAT practice and asked the parents to make sure that the kids are there for those day because the practice time cannot be made up. The way the practice was described the kids are doing far more then just reviewing a few questions.

Those may have been the actual testing days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We went to the Open House yesterday. DS teacher called out three days that are used for CogAT practice and asked the parents to make sure that the kids are there for those day because the practice time cannot be made up. The way the practice was described the kids are doing far more then just reviewing a few questions.

Those may have been the actual testing days.

Nope, they listed three practice days and then the actual test days. They were clear that the practice days could not be made up but helped the kids feel more comfortable when the test took place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When FCPS only had 5% in GT, it wasn't a big deal if you weren't in. A lot of smart kids weren't. Now that 20% or more are in AAP, it feels like more of an insult for the bright kids who aren't accepted.

AAP outnumbers GE at my center. The bright kids who are above grade level in math and reading, but weren't deemed "AAP material" absolutely are aware and upset by it.

This is so true. I think 20% or more in AAP is absurd. There is no difference between the middle/bottom AAP and top/middle GE kids, only cause negative morale in those center schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When FCPS only had 5% in GT, it wasn't a big deal if you weren't in. A lot of smart kids weren't. Now that 20% or more are in AAP, it feels like more of an insult for the bright kids who aren't accepted.

AAP outnumbers GE at my center. The bright kids who are above grade level in math and reading, but weren't deemed "AAP material" absolutely are aware and upset by it.

This is so true. I think 20% or more in AAP is absurd. There is no difference between the middle/bottom AAP and top/middle GE kids, only cause negative morale in those center schools.

The biggest problem with 20% of the kids getting in is that even in AAP, teachers will teach to the bottom students in the class. The bottom is much lower with 20% of the kids in AAP than it was with 5%. The school and AAP teachers have made it clear that their main focus is on the AAP kids who are merely on grade level, and it's not on providing extensions for the kids who are well above grade level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When FCPS only had 5% in GT, it wasn't a big deal if you weren't in. A lot of smart kids weren't. Now that 20% or more are in AAP, it feels like more of an insult for the bright kids who aren't accepted.

AAP outnumbers GE at my center. The bright kids who are above grade level in math and reading, but weren't deemed "AAP material" absolutely are aware and upset by it.

This is so true. I think 20% or more in AAP is absurd. There is no difference between the middle/bottom AAP and top/middle GE kids, only cause negative morale in those center schools.

There has to be a cutoff somewhere. Someone's feelings will always be hurt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When FCPS only had 5% in GT, it wasn't a big deal if you weren't in. A lot of smart kids weren't. Now that 20% or more are in AAP, it feels like more of an insult for the bright kids who aren't accepted.

AAP outnumbers GE at my center. The bright kids who are above grade level in math and reading, but weren't deemed "AAP material" absolutely are aware and upset by it.

This is so true. I think 20% or more in AAP is absurd. There is no difference between the middle/bottom AAP and top/middle GE kids, only cause negative morale in those center schools.

The biggest problem with 20% of the kids getting in is that even in AAP, teachers will teach to the bottom students in the class. The bottom is much lower with 20% of the kids in AAP than it was with 5%. The school and AAP teachers have made it clear that their main focus is on the AAP kids who are merely on grade level, and it's not on providing extensions for the kids who are well above grade level.

Who has made this clear to you? That certainly isnt the case in DC's AAP classes so far. With all this prepping it does seem like some kids are getting in based on falsely high scores. Seems like that needs to be nipped in the bud or AAP needs to start kicking out kids who cant keep up. My nephew is in a gifted program in another part of the country where you have to test in every year. We need to at least only keep the kids whose grades reflect that they can keep up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When FCPS only had 5% in GT, it wasn't a big deal if you weren't in. A lot of smart kids weren't. Now that 20% or more are in AAP, it feels like more of an insult for the bright kids who aren't accepted.

AAP outnumbers GE at my center. The bright kids who are above grade level in math and reading, but weren't deemed "AAP material" absolutely are aware and upset by it.

This is so true. I think 20% or more in AAP is absurd. There is no difference between the middle/bottom AAP and top/middle GE kids, only cause negative morale in those center schools.

The biggest problem with 20% of the kids getting in is that even in AAP, teachers will teach to the bottom students in the class. The bottom is much lower with 20% of the kids in AAP than it was with 5%. The school and AAP teachers have made it clear that their main focus is on the AAP kids who are merely on grade level, and it's not on providing extensions for the kids who are well above grade level.

Having heard stories about the excessive homework and too-fast pace of the program many years ago, I feel like this is a feature, not a bug.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When FCPS only had 5% in GT, it wasn't a big deal if you weren't in. A lot of smart kids weren't. Now that 20% or more are in AAP, it feels like more of an insult for the bright kids who aren't accepted.

AAP outnumbers GE at my center. The bright kids who are above grade level in math and reading, but weren't deemed "AAP material" absolutely are aware and upset by it.

This is so true. I think 20% or more in AAP is absurd. There is no difference between the middle/bottom AAP and top/middle GE kids, only cause negative morale in those center schools.

The biggest problem with 20% of the kids getting in is that even in AAP, teachers will teach to the bottom students in the class. The bottom is much lower with 20% of the kids in AAP than it was with 5%. The school and AAP teachers have made it clear that their main focus is on the AAP kids who are merely on grade level, and it's not on providing extensions for the kids who are well above grade level.

Who has made this clear to you? That certainly isnt the case in DC's AAP classes so far. With all this prepping it does seem like some kids are getting in based on falsely high scores. Seems like that needs to be nipped in the bud or AAP needs to start kicking out kids who cant keep up. My nephew is in a gifted program in another part of the country where you have to test in every year. We need to at least only keep the kids whose grades reflect that they can keep up.

Np here. I think that most kids in AAP are strong in either math or writing but not always both. I would say all kids I have encountered are strong in at least one. I have two kids in AAP. Both very advanced in math and science. Writing is average. They keep up just fine. The kids who aren’t so strong in math have a harder time keeping up in math. Sometimes the math is taught in an unconventional way that I am unfamiliar with but my kids do fine with since they learned the concept in school. I could see this going south fast for average math student who can’t get help from home because parent didn’t do math the same way 30 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When FCPS only had 5% in GT, it wasn't a big deal if you weren't in. A lot of smart kids weren't. Now that 20% or more are in AAP, it feels like more of an insult for the bright kids who aren't accepted.

AAP outnumbers GE at my center. The bright kids who are above grade level in math and reading, but weren't deemed "AAP material" absolutely are aware and upset by it.

This is so true. I think 20% or more in AAP is absurd. There is no difference between the middle/bottom AAP and top/middle GE kids, only cause negative morale in those center schools.

It seems to me that here is a desire for a far more rigerous curriculum. Why doesn't fcps just offer that to anyone who wants it.

Might that cause problems with fcps's equity scheme?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
It seems to me that here is a desire for a far more rigerous curriculum. Why doesn't fcps just offer that to anyone who wants it.

Might that cause problems with fcps's equity scheme?

Yes! My biggest issue with AAP is that it's at best a mildly accelerated curriculum that isn't enough for kids who are truly gifted. I'm not sure whether having 20% of the kids in AAP is watering down the curriculum or whether FCPS intends for the program to be very unstressful and unchallenging for the kids. AAP should be operating at least two years above grade level, as that's well within the reach of kids who are gifted and not just above average.

[Anonymous]

Gifted =/= accelerated... even by two grade levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gifted =/= accelerated... even by two grade levels.

Of course, but if the curriculum isn't going to go significantly faster or deeper than the regular curriculum, there's no reason for the segregation between AAP and gen ed.

[Anonymous]

They let too many disruptive kids into AAP, as it is. Since we are talking about the issue.

[Anonymous]

AAP is trying too hard to serve too many different groups of kids in the same program. Kids who are 2E, kids who are gifted but underachievers, kids who are gifted and high achievers, and kids who are not gifted but high achievers all have different needs. The first two groups need a lot more scaffolding and supports in place. The third groups needs significantly more acceleration than they're getting. The fourth group is well served in the current model of mild acceleration, except they resent the presence of the first two groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We went to the Open House yesterday. DS teacher called out three days that are used for CogAT practice and asked the parents to make sure that the kids are there for those day because the practice time cannot be made up. The way the practice was described the kids are doing far more then just reviewing a few questions.

Which school?