Anonymous wrote:Absolutely agree. Giftedness is really rare.
Anonymous wrote:AAP is so watered down it is a joke. Most of the kids in AAp don't belong. As a FCPS teacher I have experienced about four gifted kids in the last ten years. They truly stand out and are rare. Now any parent who pushes can get their average child into AAP. And most of them are AVERAGE! Yes you all think your son or daughter is brilliant. Well, they are not. And continually praising their brilliance is just setting them up for greater failure as many of them believe that they don't need to do anything as mom and dad have constantly told them how bright they are.....
Anonymous wrote:What's the point of the question? With all the digs at AAP on this site, I tend to suspect that this is an attempt to stir the pot and set up yet another "let's bash AAP and those pushy parents" discussion.
Nope. No pot stirring going on here. None at all.
AAP class percentages as contrasted to Global Warming? -- Err, Ok. I'll give the PP a +1000.
Anonymous wrote:Hmmm... so, if we have 15 kids per high school grade in AAP -- that's about what? 5 kids per middle school grade? And thus about 1 kid from each elementary school, eh?
Yeah, that would be a great program. Critical mass? Not.
What's the point of the question? With all the digs at AAP on this site, I tend to suspect that this is an attempt to stir the pot and set up yet another "let's bash AAP and those pushy parents" discussion.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When I was in highschool years and years ago, there were 10-15 kids in the entire senior class who were part of a "gifted" program. A tiny tiny sliver of the whole class.
Now we have a massive percentage of the class in the "advanced" group. Something just seems wrong.
Why is the "tiny sliver" way correct, and the current percentage "wrong"?
Yes. There is no Global warming---look at all of the snowflakes we have today compared to yesteryear.
+1
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When I was in highschool years and years ago, there were 10-15 kids in the entire senior class who were part of a "gifted" program. A tiny tiny sliver of the whole class.
Now we have a massive percentage of the class in the "advanced" group. Something just seems wrong.
Why is the "tiny sliver" way correct, and the current percentage "wrong"?
Yes. There is no Global warming---look at all of the snowflakes we have today compared to yesteryear.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When I was in highschool years and years ago, there were 10-15 kids in the entire senior class who were part of a "gifted" program. A tiny tiny sliver of the whole class.
Now we have a massive percentage of the class in the "advanced" group. Something just seems wrong.
Why is the "tiny sliver" way correct, and the current percentage "wrong"?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I'm not naive enough to think centers will go away anytime soon, but I just wonder if the benefits to the few outweigh the drawbacks.
This is the "Local Level IV at every elementary school and a new Level V AAP Center for the top 6% of students" argument.
What's wrong with it? I think it's a good one.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I'm not naive enough to think centers will go away anytime soon, but I just wonder if the benefits to the few outweigh the drawbacks.
This is the "Local Level IV at every elementary school and a new Level V AAP Center for the top 6% of students" argument.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When I was in highschool years and years ago, there were 10-15 kids in the entire senior class who were part of a "gifted" program. A tiny tiny sliver of the whole class.
Now we have a massive percentage of the class in the "advanced" group. Something just seems wrong.
Why is the "tiny sliver" way correct, and the current percentage "wrong"?
Anonymous wrote:When I was in highschool years and years ago, there were 10-15 kids in the entire senior class who were part of a "gifted" program. A tiny tiny sliver of the whole class.
Now we have a massive percentage of the class in the "advanced" group. Something just seems wrong.