Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how some person concludes that this study equates to not getting rid of AAP in spite of the fact it mostly just caters to higher SES families and ignores many who are equally deserving but without the means to work the system.

Here’s the problem with that statement: not everyone who has the means to work the system gets into aap and there are also a lot kids who get into aap without the means.

Kids are tracked by their ability, not by how much the parents make. And sure- those parents could honestly be sending their kids to kumon every week but the reality is that a lot of it is that you can see the difference when kids aren’t taught at their level.

And if you read the article instead of just the title of this thread you would understand that.

Okay people with means and some modest desire can easily work the system. It just takes a private diagnosis and a few appeals.

Yup. Many kids get in with bogus scores paid for by wealthy parents.

I get that it's mostly a way for UMC to get their kids in a more academically focused environment and not a gifted program, but when I see people later claim that only AAP students should have a shot at TJ, I feel that's incredibly unfair even though my kids were in AAP.

The larger issue is Gen Ed. The way we are educating in this country is not working. In a 6th grade classroom, you will have kids who speak no English, kids reading on a second grade level, kids reading on a 4th grade level and kids reading on grade level or above. With class sizes ranging from 25-31 it is a disaster. If every teacher had 20 kids with about 3 levels instead of 6, real change could happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how some person concludes that this study equates to not getting rid of AAP in spite of the fact it mostly just caters to higher SES families and ignores many who are equally deserving but without the means to work the system.

Here’s the problem with that statement: not everyone who has the means to work the system gets into aap and there are also a lot kids who get into aap without the means.

Kids are tracked by their ability, not by how much the parents make. And sure- those parents could honestly be sending their kids to kumon every week but the reality is that a lot of it is that you can see the difference when kids aren’t taught at their level.

And if you read the article instead of just the title of this thread you would understand that.

Okay people with means and some modest desire can easily work the system. It just takes a private diagnosis and a few appeals.

Yup. Many kids get in with bogus scores paid for by wealthy parents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Everyone was challenged. Parents were much less stressed because they didn’t have to worry about prepping their kids for tests in first grade that would determine their academic path for the next seven years. Everyone was much happier. Nobody even knew which group they were in, so as far as the kids were concerned they were all on the same level. But we can’t do that here. We’ve got to be elitist somehow. ”

There is support for AAP from many parents because in K-2 FCPS schools do exactly what you said - a group for this or that level in a mixed room. And their experience 9 times out of 10 is that the fast group barely meets with the teacher as her time is focused much more heavily on the slower groups. It’s frustrating to have such unequal amounts of teacher time over and over.

+1 In theory, I have no problem with the way the first PP is running her class. It's fine to have mixed ability classes with many levels if the teacher is somehow capable of challenging everyone. In practice, among the 12 ES teachers my kids have had, only one of them was capable of challenging and stretching every kid in the classroom. The other 11 ignored the advanced kids and stuck them on edu-tainment computer programs all day. My kids have had many years where their reading group met with the teacher for only 15 minutes every second week.

Yep, it's a matter of degree. Even AAP classrooms are mixed ability, it's just a narrower range of abilities (and in turn allows Gen Ed classes to have a narrower range of abilities as well)... and is feasible to teach groups in those environments to their level, but throw them all into one classroom and it just becomes too much for a teacher to manage and teach effectively, their time just gets split too many ways (and is that many more lesson plans and such to coordinate each week), else you force some kids into groups ill-suited to their level because you have to reduce the # of groupings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how some person concludes that this study equates to not getting rid of AAP in spite of the fact it mostly just caters to higher SES families and ignores many who are equally deserving but without the means to work the system.

Here’s the problem with that statement: not everyone who has the means to work the system gets into aap and there are also a lot kids who get into aap without the means.

Kids are tracked by their ability, not by how much the parents make. And sure- those parents could honestly be sending their kids to kumon every week but the reality is that a lot of it is that you can see the difference when kids aren’t taught at their level.

And if you read the article instead of just the title of this thread you would understand that.

Okay people with means and some modest desire can easily work the system. It just takes a private diagnosis and a few appeals.

So when FCPS stops accepting private testing results as part of the application, what's going to be your outrage/excuse then? Also no such thing as "a few appeals."

You have no idea what you're talking about and it shows.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you for that voice of reason

There is 0 reason for any kid/ family to be doing things at home to accelerate.

If the kid is extremely smart they should just skip a grade. The obsession of thinking so many kids are bored and need more challenging content is ridiculous

In the real world no one cares when you took algebra.

There's plenty of reasons. Some kids have an interest in math, some kids love to read at home and go after more advanced material without their parents pushing them. For others, they may attend foreign schools part of the year, or they plan to return to their home country.

For other kids, they want to take advanced subjects for admission to a competitive college (thus they care about when you took algebra), or to graduate early from college which has huge financial benefits given the cost of education.

My tax dollars shouldn't be paying for that. If you want unique instruction pony up for private school. You can't demand public schools deal with this acceleration.

Replace your ire toward advanced students with those who are struggling to keep up.

My tax dollars shouldn't be paying for that. If you want remedial instruction pony up for private school. You can't demand public schools deal with this special education.

All children deserve an education suited toward their individual needs and abilities, whether they are behind, on-target or advanced.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how some person concludes that this study equates to not getting rid of AAP in spite of the fact it mostly just caters to higher SES families and ignores many who are equally deserving but without the means to work the system.

Here’s the problem with that statement: not everyone who has the means to work the system gets into aap and there are also a lot kids who get into aap without the means.

Kids are tracked by their ability, not by how much the parents make. And sure- those parents could honestly be sending their kids to kumon every week but the reality is that a lot of it is that you can see the difference when kids aren’t taught at their level.

And if you read the article instead of just the title of this thread you would understand that.

Okay people with means and some modest desire can easily work the system. It just takes a private diagnosis and a few appeals.

Anonymous wrote:“Everyone was challenged. Parents were much less stressed because they didn’t have to worry about prepping their kids for tests in first grade that would determine their academic path for the next seven years. Everyone was much happier. Nobody even knew which group they were in, so as far as the kids were concerned they were all on the same level. But we can’t do that here. We’ve got to be elitist somehow. ”

There is support for AAP from many parents because in K-2 FCPS schools do exactly what you said - a group for this or that level in a mixed room. And their experience 9 times out of 10 is that the fast group barely meets with the teacher as her time is focused much more heavily on the slower groups. It’s frustrating to have such unequal amounts of teacher time over and over.

+1 In theory, I have no problem with the way the first PP is running her class. It's fine to have mixed ability classes with many levels if the teacher is somehow capable of challenging everyone. In practice, among the 12 ES teachers my kids have had, only one of them was capable of challenging and stretching every kid in the classroom. The other 11 ignored the advanced kids and stuck them on edu-tainment computer programs all day. My kids have had many years where their reading group met with the teacher for only 15 minutes every second week.

Anonymous wrote:“Everyone was challenged. Parents were much less stressed because they didn’t have to worry about prepping their kids for tests in first grade that would determine their academic path for the next seven years. Everyone was much happier. Nobody even knew which group they were in, so as far as the kids were concerned they were all on the same level. But we can’t do that here. We’ve got to be elitist somehow. ”

There is support for AAP from many parents because in K-2 FCPS schools do exactly what you said - a group for this or that level in a mixed room. And their experience 9 times out of 10 is that the fast group barely meets with the teacher as her time is focused much more heavily on the slower groups. It’s frustrating to have such unequal amounts of teacher time over and over.

Yeah this is the wrong way to do it. You need to differentiate by the entire class. Having 4 teachers teach four different levels to each class is idiotic. To prevent fatigue you could switch levels every quarter or at least ever year. Year 1 top group Year 2 bottom group Year 3 second from bottom Year 4 second from the top etc.

“Everyone was challenged. Parents were much less stressed because they didn’t have to worry about prepping their kids for tests in first grade that would determine their academic path for the next seven years. Everyone was much happier. Nobody even knew which group they were in, so as far as the kids were concerned they were all on the same level. But we can’t do that here. We’ve got to be elitist somehow. ”

There is support for AAP from many parents because in K-2 FCPS schools do exactly what you said - a group for this or that level in a mixed room. And their experience 9 times out of 10 is that the fast group barely meets with the teacher as her time is focused much more heavily on the slower groups. It’s frustrating to have such unequal amounts of teacher time over and over.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]


Is she in adv math? We look at all students SOL scores and Math IReady to see if acceleration is appropriate. We have a few kids flex in and I have a few kids flex out for regular math. This is a Local Level 4. [/quote]

Previous poster here.

No, we never did any test prep of any kind with any of my kids as it fundamentally goes against my principles as an educator. She isn’t the best test taker, so her SOLs are in the high 480s, but they’re not high enough to get into advanced math. She’s exactly where she needs to be. The problem is, for whatever reason, she is not being challenged in her current math class (hence my previously stated opinions). I do not think the lessons *are* being differentiated . If they were, she would not be coming home with sleeves of pen tattoos all over her arm because she is “bored in math”. However, the answer is not to put her into an advanced math class. I believe the answer is to give *all* children the opportunity to be challenged in the non AAP/ advanced math setting. I see the work that she brings home. It takes her 30 seconds to do a sheet that’s supposed to take at least five to ten minutes. Not all kids are great test takers.. It does not mean they are not smart and should not be challenged.

I understand the sentiment behind tracking kids with similar abilities. It is easier to teach kids when they are all at a similar ability level . But we didn’t get into teaching because it’s easy. It’s hard when you have some kids who are naturally fast learners and others who barely speak a word of English. But providing challenging instruction is achievable, and it is my job. Especially, in math when you’re using a spiral approach to the curriculum. I had four different levels in my math class and each required a challenging environment. My hexagons were well above grade level (think AAP) and my circles were basically my SEN/ESOL kids. Literally, some did not speak a word of English (and for those kids they would actually go to the ESOL room to get help with their work). My squares and triangles were everything in between. It was hard, but it worked. Everyone was challenged. Parents were much less stressed because they didn’t have to worry about prepping their kids for tests in first grade that would determine their academic path for the next seven years. Everyone was much happier. Nobody even knew which group they were in, so as far as the kids were concerned they were all on the same level. But we can’t do that here. We’ve got to be elitist somehow.

Clearly, I’m not a fan of AAP as it is currently operates in FCPS- not just for academic reasons, but for social/emotional reasons as well. When these kids get into the real world, they’re going to have to communicate and work with people from all backgrounds and all skill levels. Ironically, DH is currently interviewing candidates for an international advisory firm. The number one thing he looks for is their ability to do just that: communicate and connect with people from different backgrounds. Nobody is getting asked about their GPAs or what school they attended. .

Meanwhile, my daughter won’t be going to the same middle school as her best friends because they’re in AAP am she’s not. Because who needs their best friends in middle school?
[/quote]


I think the issue is staffing. ESOL support is atrocious at the ES level. It is very hard for 1 teacher to differentiate 4 or more different levels with class sizes so high. It looks like you had some support for math which not all teachers do. I personally think there needs to be class sizes at no more than 20 to make differentiation actually effective and not overwhelming. There are ES Math classrooms with 28-35 kids right now.

[quote=Anonymous]


Is she in adv math? We look at all students SOL scores and Math IReady to see if acceleration is appropriate. We have a few kids flex in and I have a few kids flex out for regular math. This is a Local Level 4. [/quote]

Previous poster here.

No, we never did any test prep of any kind with any of my kids as it fundamentally goes against my principles as an educator. She isn’t the best test taker, so her SOLs are in the high 480s, but they’re not high enough to get into advanced math. She’s exactly where she needs to be. The problem is, for whatever reason, she is not being challenged in her current math class (hence my previously stated opinions). I do not think the lessons *are* being differentiated . If they were, she would not be coming home with sleeves of pen tattoos all over her arm because she is “bored in math”. However, the answer is not to put her into an advanced math class. I believe the answer is to give *all* children the opportunity to be challenged in the non AAP/ advanced math setting. I see the work that she brings home. It takes her 30 seconds to do a sheet that’s supposed to take at least five to ten minutes. Not all kids are great test takers.. It does not mean they are not smart and should not be challenged.

I understand the sentiment behind tracking kids with similar abilities. It is easier to teach kids when they are all at a similar ability level . But we didn’t get into teaching because it’s easy. It’s hard when you have some kids who are naturally fast learners and others who barely speak a word of English. But providing challenging instruction is achievable, and it is my job. Especially, in math when you’re using a spiral approach to the curriculum. I had four different levels in my math class and each required a challenging environment. My hexagons were well above grade level (think AAP) and my circles were basically my SEN/ESOL kids. Literally, some did not speak a word of English (and for those kids they would actually go to the ESOL room to get help with their work). My squares and triangles were everything in between. It was hard, but it worked. Everyone was challenged. Parents were much less stressed because they didn’t have to worry about prepping their kids for tests in first grade that would determine their academic path for the next seven years. Everyone was much happier. Nobody even knew which group they were in, so as far as the kids were concerned they were all on the same level. But we can’t do that here. We’ve got to be elitist somehow.

Clearly, I’m not a fan of AAP as it is currently operates in FCPS- not just for academic reasons, but for social/emotional reasons as well. When these kids get into the real world, they’re going to have to communicate and work with people from all backgrounds and all skill levels. Ironically, DH is currently interviewing candidates for an international advisory firm. The number one thing he looks for is their ability to do just that: communicate and connect with people from different backgrounds. Nobody is getting asked about their GPAs or what school they attended. .

Meanwhile, my daughter won’t be going to the same middle school as her best friends because they’re in AAP am she’s not. Because who needs their best friends in middle school?

Anonymous wrote:There are ways to differentiate math lessons to be challenging to all ability levels. If you can’t, then you’re doing it wrong. We are expected to do it all the time in England where I used to teach. There is no AAP. (well, not as it is here). You want your kid to be a PM or go to Oxford? Fork out the cash for private school and get them horseback riding lessons. I’m all for small group tracking within a heterogeneous classroom environment, but the problem with having separate classes is that it gives you zero flexibility to change those groups. Rarely, even in AAP, do all children excel in all topics. You might have kids who are brilliant at one topic and need more help with another. But they’re not going to get that help in AAP because you’re not differentiating the curriculum. Personally, I think it’s a disservice to the child in the long run. Plus, you’re basically setting up the kids who don’t get in for failure. I have a very bright young daughter (scored in the 96th percentile on the Cogats and is currently exceeding grade level expectations in math and LA). She is told constantly by hers peers that she is “in the dumb class” because she is not in AAP. And she believes it. No matter how much we talk to her. No matter how much her counselors talk to her. No matter how much her teachers talk to her. She’s in fourth grade and she has already given up on learning. It’s sad. Luckily, her mom is a teacher so I won’t let that happen, but still. Sad.

There is clustering or grouping by subject at DCs' AAP Center, BOTH in Gen Ed and AAP classrooms. The only real difference AAP facilitates is rather than a single teacher trying to span groups that are anywhere from a grade level or two behind (on average) up to two or more grade levels ahead (on average) and everything in between in a single classroom is that instead by splitting the classes you allow fewer groups within each class which is much more manageable (and/or you can target those groups/clusters more accurately by having a smaller range of current-ability for the students within each group). Based on our experience, in any given subject it seems there is significant overlap between the level/curriculum most advanced Gen Ed classroom group is working on vs. the least advanced AAP classroom group at that same grade level.

Anonymous wrote:There are ways to differentiate math lessons to be challenging to all ability levels. If you can’t, then you’re doing it wrong. We are expected to do it all the time in England where I used to teach. There is no AAP. (well, not as it is here). You want your kid to be a PM or go to Oxford? Fork out the cash for private school and get them horseback riding lessons. I’m all for small group tracking within a heterogeneous classroom environment, but the problem with having separate classes is that it gives you zero flexibility to change those groups. Rarely, even in AAP, do all children excel in all topics. You might have kids who are brilliant at one topic and need more help with another. But they’re not going to get that help in AAP because you’re not differentiating the curriculum. Personally, I think it’s a disservice to the child in the long run. Plus, you’re basically setting up the kids who don’t get in for failure. I have a very bright young daughter (scored in the 96th percentile on the Cogats and is currently exceeding grade level expectations in math and LA). She is told constantly by hers peers that she is “in the dumb class” because she is not in AAP. And she believes it. No matter how much we talk to her. No matter how much her counselors talk to her. No matter how much her teachers talk to her. She’s in fourth grade and she has already given up on learning. It’s sad. Luckily, her mom is a teacher so I won’t let that happen, but still. Sad.

Is she in adv math? We look at all students SOL scores and Math IReady to see if acceleration is appropriate. We have a few kids flex in and I have a few kids flex out for regular math. This is a Local Level 4.

There are ways to differentiate math lessons to be challenging to all ability levels. If you can’t, then you’re doing it wrong. We are expected to do it all the time in England where I used to teach. There is no AAP. (well, not as it is here). You want your kid to be a PM or go to Oxford? Fork out the cash for private school and get them horseback riding lessons. I’m all for small group tracking within a heterogeneous classroom environment, but the problem with having separate classes is that it gives you zero flexibility to change those groups. Rarely, even in AAP, do all children excel in all topics. You might have kids who are brilliant at one topic and need more help with another. But they’re not going to get that help in AAP because you’re not differentiating the curriculum. Personally, I think it’s a disservice to the child in the long run. Plus, you’re basically setting up the kids who don’t get in for failure. I have a very bright young daughter (scored in the 96th percentile on the Cogats and is currently exceeding grade level expectations in math and LA). She is told constantly by hers peers that she is “in the dumb class” because she is not in AAP. And she believes it. No matter how much we talk to her. No matter how much her counselors talk to her. No matter how much her teachers talk to her. She’s in fourth grade and she has already given up on learning. It’s sad. Luckily, her mom is a teacher so I won’t let that happen, but still. Sad.