Anonymous wrote:I have a child that is behind in math and has been receiving remediation this year that she has found to be helpful. Teaching new math concepts before she has mastered the old ones wouldn't work because math builds on itself - a child who can't multiply won't be able to divide, for example.

*My child isn't in AAP and doesn't belong in AAP. If I had a child in AAP who needed remediation, I would either get twice a week tutoring over the summer to get them caught up or take that child out of AAP for the following year depending on how far behind they were.

Anonymous wrote:I have a child that is behind in math and has been receiving remediation this year that she has found to be helpful. Teaching new math concepts before she has mastered the old ones wouldn't work because math builds on itself - a child who can't multiply won't be able to divide, for example.

Division is just subtraction.

*My child isn't in AAP and doesn't belong in AAP. If I had a child in AAP who needed remediation, I would either get twice a week tutoring over the summer to get them caught up or take that child out of AAP for the following year depending on how far behind they were.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would FCPS invest in teaching accelerated content to a student who hasn’t mastered previously taught concepts and needs remediation. This makes absolutely no sense.

You are missing the point here. The question being asked is should FCPS invest in pre-teaching from the get go so that the student wouldnt need remedial? Similar to what involved parents do at home or through enrichment (although for different reason, which is giving their child a leg up).

If a student needs pre-teaching to get a concept the first time w their peers then they shouldn’t be in AAP. This question should probably be asked in FCPS forum.

Large majority of AAP students are enrolled in math enrichment that exposes them to math concepts before it's taught in school classroom. Are you saying they shouldn't be in AAP?

Anonymous wrote:For my 2E kid who was bored in math (and not paying attention or trying) we were counseled that DC needed more of a challenge instead of review/remediation. It was a disaster. Kid had to retake the entire class because of so many missing/weak fundamental skills.

There is no rush. Get the basics down first.

Anonymous wrote:My wild guess. Without learning-in-advance at outside enrichment center and/or at home, about half of AAP students would be sitting in remedial.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do your thinking your child is going to learn the advanced content if they haven't even grasped the prerequisite content?
Yes it's good to spiral, doing a little of everything, and then a little more of everything, and the repetition helps it sink in, but going ahead to harder stuff before you are ready is disastrous.

that's the question. Is it better to enable repetition with enrichment in advance before school class, as opposed to post-class with remedial?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math teacher:

It's kind of both. I preteach remedial skills necessary to access grade level skills.
Suppose next week's lesson is solving multistep equations in algebra 1. Then with my double block kids, I'm spending this week reviewing 1 and 2 step equations, the distributive property, and combining like terms (remediation) so that they are ready to hit the ground running with multistep. In class, they will spend 20 minutes reviewing that, but we will spend 2-3 blocks.

When we are going to hit factoring, I spend 2-3 blocks reviewing multiplying binomials, multiplication facts, and exponent laws so that when factoring is introduced they can keep up with the class.

This is not AAP though. If this level of support is needed in AAP, the student is severely misplaced.

It makes zero sense to dive into material that they don't have the foundational knowledge to access.

In your class, before you introduced the new lesson in solving multistep equations, would a remedial bound student benefit from getting a prelesson in that topic, so that your class is not the first time they encounter that new topic? Many "successful students" in your class who attend outside enrichment centers appear to be benefiting from that sort of pre-learning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math teacher:

It's kind of both. I preteach remedial skills necessary to access grade level skills.
Suppose next week's lesson is solving multistep equations in algebra 1. Then with my double block kids, I'm spending this week reviewing 1 and 2 step equations, the distributive property, and combining like terms (remediation) so that they are ready to hit the ground running with multistep. In class, they will spend 20 minutes reviewing that, but we will spend 2-3 blocks.

When we are going to hit factoring, I spend 2-3 blocks reviewing multiplying binomials, multiplication facts, and exponent laws so that when factoring is introduced they can keep up with the class.

This is not AAP though. If this level of support is needed in AAP, the student is severely misplaced.

It makes zero sense to dive into material that they don't have the foundational knowledge to access.

In your class, before you introduced the new lesson in solving multistep equations, would a remedial bound student benefit from getting a prelesson in that topic, so that your class is not the first time they encounter that new topic? Many "successful students" in your class who attend outside enrichment centers appear to be benefiting from that sort of pre-learning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wanted to get input on what is better for underperforming students?

Remediation reteaches content from previous units or grade level that student failed to learn.

Whereas acceleration, would allow underperforming student to start learning new concepts before it is taught in the class, readying the student for new learning alongside their classmates who get it the first time.

Sure acceleration involves parent investing their time at home or making a small investment in outside enrichment like kumon or such. But if FCPS is investing in remediation, shouldn't they be investing in or expected to pay for acceleration if that is a better way for underperforming students to be at the same level as their classmates.

Remediation for skills based subjects (e.g. math, grammar, spelling, phonics) and acceleration for content-based subjects (e.g. science, history, English, etc)

Anonymous wrote:How do your thinking your child is going to learn the advanced content if they haven't even grasped the prerequisite content?
Yes it's good to spiral, doing a little of everything, and then a little more of everything, and the repetition helps it sink in, but going ahead to harder stuff before you are ready is disastrous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would FCPS invest in teaching accelerated content to a student who hasn’t mastered previously taught concepts and needs remediation. This makes absolutely no sense.

You are missing the point here. The question being asked is should FCPS invest in pre-teaching from the get go so that the student wouldnt need remedial? Similar to what involved parents do at home or through enrichment (although for different reason, which is giving their child a leg up).

If a student needs pre-teaching to get a concept the first time w their peers then they shouldn’t be in AAP. This question should probably be asked in FCPS forum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would FCPS invest in teaching accelerated content to a student who hasn’t mastered previously taught concepts and needs remediation. This makes absolutely no sense.

You are missing the point here. The question being asked is should FCPS invest in pre-teaching from the get go so that the student wouldnt need remedial? Similar to what involved parents do at home or through enrichment (although for different reason, which is giving their child a leg up).