Anonymous wrote:Op sounds like the kind of ignoramus who goes around mocking the need to make everything handicap accessible.

Anonymous wrote:I really do not see the point of threads like this. OP - why do you care?

My oldest DC did AAP at a centre and yes I think she needed it. Math was still a lot slower than she would like but at least better than gen Ed would have been. They did do multiple neat projects.

Youngest DC is LLIV. He does not “need it” I think and faster math beyond the pace they are doing would be too much for him. School mixes classes so the LLIV kids are integrated with the other kids for hometown, SS/S, specials. Not as challenging in my view as the version of AAP older DC got but a good fit for this kid. I do not think the LLIV model would have been enough for older kiddo given that it feels like a bit more watered down version.

Anonymous wrote:Op sounds like the kind of ignoramus who goes around mocking the need to make everything handicap accessible.

pettifogger wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't see any math creativity at my children's center. Both kids felt like they learned more from their once per week AoPS math and language arts classes than they did in an entire week of AAP instruction.

My kids "needed" something, but AAP certainly wasn't it.

Yep, but I'm not even expecting 'creativity', I think many here are using this term to mean something other than procedural stuff. Creativity to me would mean something that you'd more likely to see in things like math contests, i.e clever ways of finding alternate solutions, outside the box thinking, etc. I'm not so concerned about lack of this creativity, as this is not something school should primarily be focusing on. I'm concerned that there is no focus in school on building up their reasoning and logic skills, as math in elementary school is an excellent time to do that. I'm seeing 100% procedures and algorithms and no real proof that students are taught to think about why things are true. Kids aren't even taught to ask questions, which is really, really, critical when learning something that feels hard. That's not really creativity we're talking about here, just a basic foundations of logic, reasoning, asking lots of questions, etc. that they should have a chance to practice in math class, to see where things come from, why they are true, and be able to reason their way to solving problems. When my kid says to me he learns more things from playing videogames than in class, I'm sad not only because videogames are addictive and I should be limiting the amount of time spent on them, but also because I know that he's right in some sense.. that from his point of view he feels that videogames give him more pleasure in terms of novel things to figure out, than class does.

Anonymous wrote:
Both my kids are in Advanced math, which frankly is just standard math. They both get good grades in math class. I put them in AoPS and realized how non advanced AAP/advanced math is in FCPS.

Anonymous wrote:It’s not “slightly advanced” or “slightly faster-paced” at our center. Math is a full year ahead and the pace is significantly accelerated. I have one child who “needs” AAP and one who could likely have educational needs met in either program, but there are absolutely children in the program who need it. Perhaps not yours and perhaps not the majority, but they do exist.

pettifogger wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't see any math creativity at my children's center. Both kids felt like they learned more from their once per week AoPS math and language arts classes than they did in an entire week of AAP instruction.

My kids "needed" something, but AAP certainly wasn't it.

Yep, but I'm not even expecting 'creativity', I think many here are using this term to mean something other than procedural stuff. Creativity to me would mean something that you'd more likely to see in things like math contests, i.e clever ways of finding alternate solutions, outside the box thinking, etc. I'm not so concerned about lack of this creativity, as this is not something school should primarily be focusing on. I'm concerned that there is no focus in school on building up their reasoning and logic skills, as math in elementary school is an excellent time to do that. I'm seeing 100% procedures and algorithms and no real proof that students are taught to think about why things are true. Kids aren't even taught to ask questions, which is really, really, critical when learning something that feels hard. That's not really creativity we're talking about here, just a basic foundations of logic, reasoning, asking lots of questions, etc. that they should have a chance to practice in math class, to see where things come from, why they are true, and be able to reason their way to solving problems. When my kid says to me he learns more things from playing videogames than in class, I'm sad not only because videogames are addictive and I should be limiting the amount of time spent on them, but also because I know that he's right in some sense.. that from his point of view he feels that videogames give him more pleasure in terms of novel things to figure out, than class does.

pettifogger wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't see any math creativity at my children's center. Both kids felt like they learned more from their once per week AoPS math and language arts classes than they did in an entire week of AAP instruction.

My kids "needed" something, but AAP certainly wasn't it.

Yep, but I'm not even expecting 'creativity', I think many here are using this term to mean something other than procedural stuff. Creativity to me would mean something that you'd more likely to see in things like math contests, i.e clever ways of finding alternate solutions, outside the box thinking, etc. I'm not so concerned about lack of this creativity, as this is not something school should primarily be focusing on. I'm concerned that there is no focus in school on building up their reasoning and logic skills, as math in elementary school is an excellent time to do that. I'm seeing 100% procedures and algorithms and no real proof that students are taught to think about why things are true. Kids aren't even taught to ask questions, which is really, really, critical when learning something that feels hard. That's not really creativity we're talking about here, just a basic foundations of logic, reasoning, asking lots of questions, etc. that they should have a chance to practice in math class, to see where things come from, why they are true, and be able to reason their way to solving problems. When my kid says to me he learns more things from playing videogames than in class, I'm sad not only because videogames are addictive and I should be limiting the amount of time spent on them, but also because I know that he's right in some sense.. that from his point of view he feels that videogames give him more pleasure in terms of novel things to figure out, than class does.

Anonymous wrote:I didn't see any math creativity at my children's center. Both kids felt like they learned more from their once per week AoPS math and language arts classes than they did in an entire week of AAP instruction.

My kids "needed" something, but AAP certainly wasn't it.

Anonymous wrote:

pettifogger wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really wish parents would stop propagating the whole "needs AAP" myth. Who "needs" a slightly advanced, slightly faster-paced program for slightly above-average kids? If your child is reasonably bright, the GBRS is going to make or break the application--and there is nothing a parent can do about that at this point. If anything, teachers clearly place a premium on strong executive functions over natural curiosity and brightness. Basically, they evaluate whether your child will succeed in AAP.

Sure, I'd rather have my smartish middle schooler in AAP than in Gen Ed because he's going to do whatever is asked of him (and, frankly, not much else), so I'd prefer to have the demands be on a higher level. And even though I disagree with the hours of homework per night that some elementary school teachers assign, I'd rather have my elementary-aged kid pick up certain skills than skip them altogether.

It just sounds so self-important and inflated to use this language about the AAP program. I have had several kids go through it and it's not a different unique way of presenting the material that engages and inspires brilliant minds that would otherwise atrophy. It's just a program that moves faster and has higher expectations.

If your child is above average and organized, the program will be a good fit. It your child is brilliant and creative, an out-of-the-box thinker, and (especially) not strong in the executive function areas, I strongly recommend private.

I fully agree with this description of the AAP program, and the discrepancy between how it is described (an innovative way to present the material to engage bright inquisitive minds who may tune out in a traditional classroom) and what it is (a slightly accelerated version of the same material presented in the same drill-like way.) I have one kid that is both bright and creative, and has high executive functioning, and he sleepwalked through the program. He also did AOPS for math and could really appreciate the different ways in which they teach math - explaining “why” as opposed to drilling the “what”. Unfortunately, the AAP screening process, as presented to parents, emphasizes the critical and creative thinking component (even if it is so sadly missing from the program), but as PP correctly pointed out, teachers don’t appreciate critical and creative thinking unless it also comes with high executive function. I now have a kid who is a very creative thinker with some ADHD-related executive function issues, who would jump only as high as the bar is set, and struggling with finding the right environment for him. I will refer him for AAP, but I am not 100% sure that is the best environment for him, and would rather be able to find a private that fits him well, though he loves his school and would find it devastating (at least initially) to leave.

My kids mirror yours (older one with higher executive functioning, younger who will jump only as high as the bar is set and who is incredibly creative), and our experience has not been the same. My oldest has occasionally not had enough drill in AAP to get a concept. They absolutely are attacking the math in a way that expects a higher IQ. Sometimes I have to slow things down and provide extra arithmetic drills at home to get concepts nailed in so my kid can get a concept. Kid still pulls all 4s in AAP and isn't slowing the class down or anything, but there's definitely a more creative aspect to the advanced math.

I have to highly disagree with the bolded above, based on my experience so far this year. As a math teacher, I have not seen a shred of creativity anywhere in the AAP math being taught to my 4th grade child. Everything that has been done so far this year involves doing lots and lots of multiplication, division, and decimal number drills, as well as conversions between fractions and decimals. Literally every question is repetitive and dry; not even 1 puzzle and/or logical thinking type question have I seen being assigned. My child can do this stuff pretty accurately, but he's not lightning fast, so he'll get extremely bored if he has to spend more than 30 minutes on homework questions that are all the same thing. Luckily I work with him on AoPS/Beast Academy type stuff at home, which is literally the exact opposite approach of these school drills.

I frankly don't understand the purpose of the math being "one year ahead" in the AAP program if it is so devoid of critical thinking and problem solving. Someone else said it perfectly upthread, there is no "why does this work", "why is this true", "where does this come from", no making connections, but just doing algorithms over and over. Sure, it moves fast, but it's really not what will help many of these kids when they get to do math later in high school. They will believe math is just about following a recipe of directions and memorizing algorithms, and it really saddens me to see bright hardworking kids in high school who have gotten to that point and not having had any practice on how to think mathematically on their own.

PP here who said I've seen creativity. My kids' homework questions are almost all the kinds of "why" and "where" questions you mentioned. Maybe we're just at a "good" center?

pettifogger wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really wish parents would stop propagating the whole "needs AAP" myth. Who "needs" a slightly advanced, slightly faster-paced program for slightly above-average kids? If your child is reasonably bright, the GBRS is going to make or break the application--and there is nothing a parent can do about that at this point. If anything, teachers clearly place a premium on strong executive functions over natural curiosity and brightness. Basically, they evaluate whether your child will succeed in AAP.

Sure, I'd rather have my smartish middle schooler in AAP than in Gen Ed because he's going to do whatever is asked of him (and, frankly, not much else), so I'd prefer to have the demands be on a higher level. And even though I disagree with the hours of homework per night that some elementary school teachers assign, I'd rather have my elementary-aged kid pick up certain skills than skip them altogether.

It just sounds so self-important and inflated to use this language about the AAP program. I have had several kids go through it and it's not a different unique way of presenting the material that engages and inspires brilliant minds that would otherwise atrophy. It's just a program that moves faster and has higher expectations.

If your child is above average and organized, the program will be a good fit. It your child is brilliant and creative, an out-of-the-box thinker, and (especially) not strong in the executive function areas, I strongly recommend private.

I fully agree with this description of the AAP program, and the discrepancy between how it is described (an innovative way to present the material to engage bright inquisitive minds who may tune out in a traditional classroom) and what it is (a slightly accelerated version of the same material presented in the same drill-like way.) I have one kid that is both bright and creative, and has high executive functioning, and he sleepwalked through the program. He also did AOPS for math and could really appreciate the different ways in which they teach math - explaining “why” as opposed to drilling the “what”. Unfortunately, the AAP screening process, as presented to parents, emphasizes the critical and creative thinking component (even if it is so sadly missing from the program), but as PP correctly pointed out, teachers don’t appreciate critical and creative thinking unless it also comes with high executive function. I now have a kid who is a very creative thinker with some ADHD-related executive function issues, who would jump only as high as the bar is set, and struggling with finding the right environment for him. I will refer him for AAP, but I am not 100% sure that is the best environment for him, and would rather be able to find a private that fits him well, though he loves his school and would find it devastating (at least initially) to leave.

My kids mirror yours (older one with higher executive functioning, younger who will jump only as high as the bar is set and who is incredibly creative), and our experience has not been the same. My oldest has occasionally not had enough drill in AAP to get a concept. They absolutely are attacking the math in a way that expects a higher IQ. Sometimes I have to slow things down and provide extra arithmetic drills at home to get concepts nailed in so my kid can get a concept. Kid still pulls all 4s in AAP and isn't slowing the class down or anything, but there's definitely a more creative aspect to the advanced math.

I have to highly disagree with the bolded above, based on my experience so far this year. As a math teacher, I have not seen a shred of creativity anywhere in the AAP math being taught to my 4th grade child. Everything that has been done so far this year involves doing lots and lots of multiplication, division, and decimal number drills, as well as conversions between fractions and decimals. Literally every question is repetitive and dry; not even 1 puzzle and/or logical thinking type question have I seen being assigned. My child can do this stuff pretty accurately, but he's not lightning fast, so he'll get extremely bored if he has to spend more than 30 minutes on homework questions that are all the same thing. Luckily I work with him on AoPS/Beast Academy type stuff at home, which is literally the exact opposite approach of these school drills.

I frankly don't understand the purpose of the math being "one year ahead" in the AAP program if it is so devoid of critical thinking and problem solving. Someone else said it perfectly upthread, there is no "why does this work", "why is this true", "where does this come from", no making connections, but just doing algorithms over and over. Sure, it moves fast, but it's really not what will help many of these kids when they get to do math later in high school. They will believe math is just about following a recipe of directions and memorizing algorithms, and it really saddens me to see bright hardworking kids in high school who have gotten to that point and not having had any practice on how to think mathematically on their own.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really wish parents would stop propagating the whole "needs AAP" myth. Who "needs" a slightly advanced, slightly faster-paced program for slightly above-average kids? If your child is reasonably bright, the GBRS is going to make or break the application--and there is nothing a parent can do about that at this point. If anything, teachers clearly place a premium on strong executive functions over natural curiosity and brightness. Basically, they evaluate whether your child will succeed in AAP.

Sure, I'd rather have my smartish middle schooler in AAP than in Gen Ed because he's going to do whatever is asked of him (and, frankly, not much else), so I'd prefer to have the demands be on a higher level. And even though I disagree with the hours of homework per night that some elementary school teachers assign, I'd rather have my elementary-aged kid pick up certain skills than skip them altogether.

It just sounds so self-important and inflated to use this language about the AAP program. I have had several kids go through it and it's not a different unique way of presenting the material that engages and inspires brilliant minds that would otherwise atrophy. It's just a program that moves faster and has higher expectations.

If your child is above average and organized, the program will be a good fit. It your child is brilliant and creative, an out-of-the-box thinker, and (especially) not strong in the executive function areas, I strongly recommend private.

I fully agree with this description of the AAP program, and the discrepancy between how it is described (an innovative way to present the material to engage bright inquisitive minds who may tune out in a traditional classroom) and what it is (a slightly accelerated version of the same material presented in the same drill-like way.) I have one kid that is both bright and creative, and has high executive functioning, and he sleepwalked through the program. He also did AOPS for math and could really appreciate the different ways in which they teach math - explaining “why” as opposed to drilling the “what”. Unfortunately, the AAP screening process, as presented to parents, emphasizes the critical and creative thinking component (even if it is so sadly missing from the program), but as PP correctly pointed out, teachers don’t appreciate critical and creative thinking unless it also comes with high executive function. I now have a kid who is a very creative thinker with some ADHD-related executive function issues, who would jump only as high as the bar is set, and struggling with finding the right environment for him. I will refer him for AAP, but I am not 100% sure that is the best environment for him, and would rather be able to find a private that fits him well, though he loves his school and would find it devastating (at least initially) to leave.

My kids mirror yours (older one with higher executive functioning, younger who will jump only as high as the bar is set and who is incredibly creative), and our experience has not been the same. My oldest has occasionally not had enough drill in AAP to get a concept. They absolutely are attacking the math in a way that expects a higher IQ. Sometimes I have to slow things down and provide extra arithmetic drills at home to get concepts nailed in so my kid can get a concept. Kid still pulls all 4s in AAP and isn't slowing the class down or anything, but there's definitely a more creative aspect to the advanced math.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really wish parents would stop propagating the whole "needs AAP" myth. Who "needs" a slightly advanced, slightly faster-paced program for slightly above-average kids? If your child is reasonably bright, the GBRS is going to make or break the application--and there is nothing a parent can do about that at this point. If anything, teachers clearly place a premium on strong executive functions over natural curiosity and brightness. Basically, they evaluate whether your child will succeed in AAP.

Sure, I'd rather have my smartish middle schooler in AAP than in Gen Ed because he's going to do whatever is asked of him (and, frankly, not much else), so I'd prefer to have the demands be on a higher level. And even though I disagree with the hours of homework per night that some elementary school teachers assign, I'd rather have my elementary-aged kid pick up certain skills than skip them altogether.

It just sounds so self-important and inflated to use this language about the AAP program. I have had several kids go through it and it's not a different unique way of presenting the material that engages and inspires brilliant minds that would otherwise atrophy. It's just a program that moves faster and has higher expectations.

If your child is above average and organized, the program will be a good fit. It your child is brilliant and creative, an out-of-the-box thinker, and (especially) not strong in the executive function areas, I strongly recommend private.

I fully agree with this description of the AAP program, and the discrepancy between how it is described (an innovative way to present the material to engage bright inquisitive minds who may tune out in a traditional classroom) and what it is (a slightly accelerated version of the same material presented in the same drill-like way.) I have one kid that is both bright and creative, and has high executive functioning, and he sleepwalked through the program. He also did AOPS for math and could really appreciate the different ways in which they teach math - explaining “why” as opposed to drilling the “what”. Unfortunately, the AAP screening process, as presented to parents, emphasizes the critical and creative thinking component (even if it is so sadly missing from the program), but as PP correctly pointed out, teachers don’t appreciate critical and creative thinking unless it also comes with high executive function. I now have a kid who is a very creative thinker with some ADHD-related executive function issues, who would jump only as high as the bar is set, and struggling with finding the right environment for him. I will refer him for AAP, but I am not 100% sure that is the best environment for him, and would rather be able to find a private that fits him well, though he loves his school and would find it devastating (at least initially) to leave.