Anonymous wrote:IME for a few reasons the GT program is unimpressive.
At most schools APS uses a push-in model, which basically means the RTG helps teachers develop lessons that supposedly scaffold the curriculum for individualized learning. There are few pull-outs where the RTG spends time with a small group of high ability kids to teach content. In many cases, the scaffold is based on things like choice boards, where three options are given to kids to complete for a particular lesson ranging from options that are easy to those that are more challenging. The goal of push-in is that all students benefit from activities like Jacob's Ladder. As a result, delivery of scaffolded academics usually falls upon the teachers who have a range of training and/or interest and/or time to address the needs of high ability kids.
Kids are supposed to be clustered with similarly high ability kids, but the cluster only has to be 5-8 kids because any bigger and you could run the risk of being accused of tracking. When so few in a classroom need that level of differentiation, the teachers are absolutely going to focus on the mid-range and low performers. Those 5 can float along and this was even worse during Covid.
Finally, APS's buzzword is equity. It is not fair to continue to allow certain kids to have a leg up on others because their parents have provided enrichment or they truly are high ability because in most cases that is a delineator between wealthier white kids and poorer brown kids. You can't offer anything to anyone unless you offer it to everyone, in which case it can't be too far advanced because it isn't accessible. Which is kind of the point, but whatever.
This