Reply to Which schools only have LIV kids in their LLIV program?

Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)

Reply to "Which schools only have LIV kids in their LLIV program?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Why are you against the Center?[/quote]

I’m not the OP, but I really wish we didn’t have to choose the center to get a non cluster model. The bus ride is nearly an hour, it feeds into a different high school than his base (so friends won’t stick around), and he doesn’t get to know the neighborhood kids (we moved here in 3rd grade)[/quote]

I think you're confused about what is and is not clustering. LLIV programs have ALWAYS been a mix of LLIV and principal placed LIII children. That's NOT clustering, it's just filling the classroom. Clustering is when a school doesn't have an LLIV classroom at all but separates out kids for advanced math.[/quote]

Wait, what? So clustering means...no LLIV for any subject but math (pull outs)? Or is it there some attempt at differentiation within the classroom for other subjects? Or does the meaning of clustering depend on the school?

Also, just curious if anyone knows how long clustering has been a thing in FCPS? Sounds like it's happening more with the increase in LLIV programs but has it always been done?[/quote]

I think the newer programs (within the last couple of years) started doing the cluster model. Then a few schools changed to it as well that had established programs. There are still schools with 1 Local Level 4 class per grade. Kids who are not Level 4 are principal placed. [/quote]

Clustering sounds like a good way to ignore the AAP kids since I don't expect a teacher to be able to consistently make 2-3 different lessons plans daily. Yay, equity![/quote]

AAP teacher here. If my school ever moved to clustering, I would leave. [/quote]
You are the reason AAP students have the attitude they have. You think you're too good for the general population? What a terrible teacher.[/quote]

I am the PP. I taught Gen Ed for years. In my Gen Ed, 6th grade classroom I had kids reading at a Kindergarten classroom all the way through an 8th grade level. It is too much for one person to differentiate that much. I switched to AAP and while I do have some lower readers, the gap is not as large and is more manageable. I have many Gen Ed kids in my class.   So, I don’t think I am too good for Gen Ed. I think what they are asking of teachers is IMPOSSIBLE!

So by going back to Clustering, I would be back at square 1 with doing the impossible.

I am a great teacher and I love my job.  I just want to be able to do my job effectively and have a work/life balance. I am sorry you interpreted my message as I am too good for Gen Ed.

As is, teaching is hard. I would be shocked if I made it the full 30 years. I wish the county made our jobs easier vs harder.

[/quote]

Clustering at least acknowledges those kids reading at the 8th grade level that you had. AAP just ensures that the above grade level kids who miss the cutoff never get a peer group and get ignored by teachers who think differentiation is too hard [/quote]

I am the PP. I think clustering works when you don’t have such a large gap. Schools that have low ESL populations and SpED populations, it would work better because the majority of the kids are on grade level. But schools with larger ESL populations and SPED needs, no one would get what they need. I much prefer ability leveled classes so everyone gets what they need. [/quote] ESL and Special Education and Gifted student populations are not separate silos.  You can have an ESL student who has an IEP and is gifted.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics