Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone speak to actual curriculum differences outside of math?

Are you looking for a side-by-side matrix? I do not think one exists as each teacher selects materials to address the Program of Studies requirements.

As an example, this is a link to the curriculum and resources for 3rd grade AAP:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/famework/Grade3.pdf

Just looking at a single section -- social studies with a focus on Ancient China and Ancient Egypt -- one resource is available from Kendall Hunt for the William & Mary Social Studies units.

Ancient China and Ancient Egypt are covered for all of Grade 3, per the FCPS Program of Studies:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/pos/documents/es/ss3.htm

A quick Google search shows a description of the William & Mary materials used in AAP:
https://education.wm.edu/centers/cfge/curriculum/socialstudies/materials/index.php

But this is just one example.

Our AAP school did not use the William and Mary materials for social studies. Anyone else or are we the only school that didn't use them?

It is not a requirement to use every resource listed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone speak to actual curriculum differences outside of math?

Are you looking for a side-by-side matrix? I do not think one exists as each teacher selects materials to address the Program of Studies requirements.

As an example, this is a link to the curriculum and resources for 3rd grade AAP:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/famework/Grade3.pdf

Just looking at a single section -- social studies with a focus on Ancient China and Ancient Egypt -- one resource is available from Kendall Hunt for the William & Mary Social Studies units.

Ancient China and Ancient Egypt are covered for all of Grade 3, per the FCPS Program of Studies:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/pos/documents/es/ss3.htm

A quick Google search shows a description of the William & Mary materials used in AAP:
https://education.wm.edu/centers/cfge/curriculum/socialstudies/materials/index.php

But this is just one example.

Our AAP school did not use the William and Mary materials for social studies. Anyone else or are we the only school that didn't use them?

Actually, Math is a bad example. Most schools will accelerate non-AAP students who excel at math

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC tried one year of center during the Elem years and then went back to LLIV. DC said the only difference was that at the center they wasted classroom time dealing with boys that cried. DC also implied that some of the kids in the center classroom were actually less motivated - ie complacent. Really not sure the pace was any different. DC's grades were the same in both environments.

You truly think an 8/9 year old can accurately summarize the difference? Considering what you wrote, she couldn't, let alone that she couldn't possibly know what is the "only" difference. Was she in a base classroom everyday or was she at the teacher mtgs? Wouldn't they crying boy be class specific, not a base/aap difference?

I am one of the other posters.

Often times, highly gifted boys especially, fall into the twice exceptional range (gifted plus a special ed diagnosis like aspergers or ADHD).

They test very high academically, but have very uneven development in other areas. Likely, that person's daughter's class had several of these kinds of students. If your kid is a bright good student, it would probably be annoying or difficult to be around a high concentration of these kinds of kids. My child didn't mind because those boys were able to move very quickly academically, so the behavior was easier to overlook. That got better by fourth and fifth for sure as thse kids evened out.

No question there might be a kid or many kids who are 2e in AAP. That doesn't mean that an 8/9 year old can accurately state that is the only difference b/w AAP and base. You can see from these responses, parents don't really know either. The "more in depth and breath" is coming from the AAP orientation, I suspect. How can we know? It would be different school to school and then from teacher to teacher. Perhaps even a single teacher has different ability groups in her class, so it could even be a smaller group where some in base get x and others get y. You cannot ask a broad question like this on a board and get an answer. You also can't expect your 8/9 year old to accurately state what the differences are. You can see from this kid's answer, she didn't know (she has no idea about the behaviors in the other classes, she mentioned nothing about writing, science, math, reading, vocabulary, CML, etc.)

Did anyone have any specific experience to compare AAP and GE for Churchill RD? My older DC is in 3rd grade AAP right now while younger DC is heading GE.

From what I've seen in written form through FCPS is that the curriculum is the same.

From what I've seen here at DCUM, the difference between AAP and Gen Ed will differ based on the school, and my child's AAP teacher said that within the AAP program, there are variations based on the teacher. So, it's really hard to say what the difference is because one's experience can differ from another. Comparing our base school's Gen Ed to our center school's curriculum is a huge difference. Comparing Gen Ed to our base school's LLIV, there isn't a huge difference.

So, I'd say, it's not so much the curriculum but these (in my experience):

1) Depth- Same curriculum as Gen Ed but the details are a lot more. They do more interdisciplinary work- like using Social Studies topics to for writing in Language Arts.
2) Pace- at our center school, there are 4 AAP classes in the grade level so they all have to be in rhythm. Units go by pretty fast. Tests are a lot more often.
3) Level of Expectation- the bar is set a lot higher for kids to be independent. Parents were told not to help with homework. The amount of stuff DC did this year in school was impressive. Not much came home as homework.
4) Organizational skills- The teachers mentioned that this at the beginning of the year as critical and they were right.

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone speak to actual curriculum differences outside of math?

Are you looking for a side-by-side matrix? I do not think one exists as each teacher selects materials to address the Program of Studies requirements.

As an example, this is a link to the curriculum and resources for 3rd grade AAP:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/famework/Grade3.pdf

Just looking at a single section -- social studies with a focus on Ancient China and Ancient Egypt -- one resource is available from Kendall Hunt for the William & Mary Social Studies units.

Ancient China and Ancient Egypt are covered for all of Grade 3, per the FCPS Program of Studies:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/pos/documents/es/ss3.htm

A quick Google search shows a description of the William & Mary materials used in AAP:
https://education.wm.edu/centers/cfge/curriculum/socialstudies/materials/index.php

But this is just one example.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone speak to actual curriculum differences outside of math?

The curriculum is the same, but the AAP and more advanced Ged-ed classes do the extentions that are optional. If you are in a school that has many children who are behind and need remediation, then the AAP program offers more differences as the gen-ed program will not include many extensions (or any). If you are at a school whare almost every child is above grade level, then the differnces are minimal. It depends on the specific population at your child's school. Ironically, the race for AAP is in the schools where there is the smallest differences.

IME, in MS there was a bigger difference between teachers than the Honor/AAP curriculum. There is no diference in HS as everyone is together again and no one really cares what classes you took in ES and MS.

Pace and depth. Others described it well earlier.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC tried one year of center during the Elem years and then went back to LLIV. DC said the only difference was that at the center they wasted classroom time dealing with boys that cried. DC also implied that some of the kids in the center classroom were actually less motivated - ie complacent. Really not sure the pace was any different. DC's grades were the same in both environments.

You truly think an 8/9 year old can accurately summarize the difference? Considering what you wrote, she couldn't, let alone that she couldn't possibly know what is the "only" difference. Was she in a base classroom everyday or was she at the teacher mtgs? Wouldn't they crying boy be class specific, not a base/aap difference?

I am one of the other posters.

Often times, highly gifted boys especially, fall into the twice exceptional range (gifted plus a special ed diagnosis like aspergers or ADHD).

They test very high academically, but have very uneven development in other areas. Likely, that person's daughter's class had several of these kinds of students. If your kid is a bright good student, it would probably be annoying or difficult to be around a high concentration of these kinds of kids. My child didn't mind because those boys were able to move very quickly academically, so the behavior was easier to overlook. That got better by fourth and fifth for sure as thse kids evened out.

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone speak to actual curriculum differences outside of math?

The curriculum is the same, but the AAP and more advanced Ged-ed classes do the extentions that are optional. If you are in a school that has many children who are behind and need remediation, then the AAP program offers more differences as the gen-ed program will not include many extensions (or any). If you are at a school whare almost every child is above grade level, then the differnces are minimal. It depends on the specific population at your child's school. Ironically, the race for AAP is in the schools where there is the smallest differences.

IME, in MS there was a bigger difference between teachers than the Honor/AAP curriculum. There is no diference in HS as everyone is together again and no one really cares what classes you took in ES and MS.

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone speak to actual curriculum differences outside of math?

OP here. I was hoping to get a sense of this too.

Can anyone speak to actual curriculum differences outside of math?

Anonymous wrote:DC tried one year of center during the Elem years and then went back to LLIV. DC said the only difference was that at the center they wasted classroom time dealing with boys that cried. DC also implied that some of the kids in the center classroom were actually less motivated - ie complacent. Really not sure the pace was any different. DC's grades were the same in both environments.

You truly think an 8/9 year old can accurately summarize the difference? Considering what you wrote, she couldn't, let alone that she couldn't possibly know what is the "only" difference. Was she in a base classroom everyday or was she at the teacher mtgs? Wouldn't they crying boy be class specific, not a base/aap difference?

Anonymous wrote:DC tried one year of center during the Elem years and then went back to LLIV. DC said the only difference was that at the center they wasted classroom time dealing with boys that cried. DC also implied that some of the kids in the center classroom were actually less motivated - ie complacent. Really not sure the pace was any different. DC's grades were the same in both environments.

You are comparing center versus LL1V. The OP is asking AAP versus Gen Ed.

DC tried one year of center during the Elem years and then went back to LLIV. DC said the only difference was that at the center they wasted classroom time dealing with boys that cried. DC also implied that some of the kids in the center classroom were actually less motivated - ie complacent. Really not sure the pace was any different. DC's grades were the same in both environments.