Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't you all tired of beating this drum about getting rid of AAP/AAP centers? In every post possible these people run over to dump on the program. Well guess what, even if they scrapped AAP and did flexible groups based on ability instead, the kids would still be able to tell who is in the "smart" group and who isn't and comment on it.

I don't agree. Flexible groups could be moved in/out of over time and kids could be grouped differently for different subjects. Homerooms/ specials would be a complete mix. The fully segregated class system that FCPS has implemented, based on completely subjective measures of 7 year olds does more harm than good. The parents of the 50% of kids who get in don't complain and the other 50% of parents are completely dismissed as bitter. So it persists. But that doesn't make it a good way to educate, even if it helps a lot of kids/ parents feel superior.

+1000
Flexible groupings are absolutely the solution. No one would be permanently labeled anything - kids would cycle into and out of groups as appropriate. It's really unbelievable to me that AAP has persisted as long as it had. Whatever happened to the very small, very selective GT program along with flexible groupings for everyone else?

Have you set foot in an FCPS elementary classroom? 1) 50% of students are not in AAP 2) there’s absolutely no way teachers are going to successfully implement differentiated teaching and identify students to regularly cycle through flexible groupings in class sizes of 28+. In theory, sure, sounds great. In practice, never going to happen. My kid couldn’t even get a math worksheet with higher level content she was begging her teacher for. “I’m sorry, I have nothing more to give you” is what she was told. Flexible groupings. lol.

Good grief. How many times must this be repeated to you? Flexible grouping does NOT mean multiple groups in one classroom. It means each teacher takes a group for all four core classes. So Mrs. X has advanced language arts, Mrs. Y has grade-level, and Mr. Z has remedial. Then the teachers have different groups for math, science, and social studies. The kids switch for each subject anyway. The kids can cycle into and out of these groups as they improve/need more help. No one is locked into any group or label. And each teacher only has one level to worry about.

So here's the problem - the kids who aren't in the above grade level classes feel dumb. We saw this this year with the different reading groups in our 2nd grade class. Teacher gave each group a color or whatever, and would move kids around between groups as needed. Nobody ever *told* the kids that one group was the smart group, but it turns out, they're observant and they can figure that out.

It turns out, flexible grouping doesn't actually protect the feelings of the kids who aren't at the top; it's the same problem as knowing your friends are going to the AAP center and you're not. This is going to be an issue weather we divide kids into center/non centers, different classes, different groups within a class, or different levels for each subject. *It even happens if you just teach at one level*, because the kids can tell who is getting it and who isn't.

The other issue with flexible grouping is that, for the most part, kids aren't just moving up and down all over the place. Sure, there are a few kids who might bounce between two levels throughout the year, but almost nobody is rocketing from the bottom to the top. I know teachers who have taught in schools that tried really hard to implement this, only to find out that in general, the kids didn't move much.

Realistically, I honestly feel like things would work best if you just every year sorted the kids into different classes in general order of academic ability

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I failed as a parent today! My child (2nd grader) came home crying today because apparently three of her friends are switching schools to go to an AAP center next year. I’m happy with my child’ performance and school, and didn’t even consider pushing for this. But she’s been crying for over an hour about how she is “stupid” and will have no friends next year. She doesn’t even want to see these girls tomorrow because they told her they aren’t friends with her anymore. I had absolutely on idea this is something kids talk about- this is my first kid. Have other parents experienced this ?

I don't believe for a hot minute that this happened.

Not the OP. This scenario happens all the time - you simply don't see it because your kid is in AAP. Those of us with kids in GE have experienced exactly this or very similar with our own kids. It's so typical that you would dismiss it though.

This is why AAP centers need to be a thing of the past.

+1. Constantly having to tell my high performing GE AAP 3 kid that he is good enough/ smart enough and not to worry about what the other kids are doing..(our base school is a center so half the grade is AAP 4 kids). Kids definitely talk...and repeat things they might hear parents (and maybe teachers) say about their gifted AAP 4 kids...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't you all tired of beating this drum about getting rid of AAP/AAP centers? In every post possible these people run over to dump on the program. Well guess what, even if they scrapped AAP and did flexible groups based on ability instead, the kids would still be able to tell who is in the "smart" group and who isn't and comment on it.

I don't agree. Flexible groups could be moved in/out of over time and kids could be grouped differently for different subjects. Homerooms/ specials would be a complete mix. The fully segregated class system that FCPS has implemented, based on completely subjective measures of 7 year olds does more harm than good. The parents of the 50% of kids who get in don't complain and the other 50% of parents are completely dismissed as bitter. So it persists. But that doesn't make it a good way to educate, even if it helps a lot of kids/ parents feel superior.

+1000
Flexible groupings are absolutely the solution. No one would be permanently labeled anything - kids would cycle into and out of groups as appropriate. It's really unbelievable to me that AAP has persisted as long as it had. Whatever happened to the very small, very selective GT program along with flexible groupings for everyone else?

Have you set foot in an FCPS elementary classroom? 1) 50% of students are not in AAP 2) there’s absolutely no way teachers are going to successfully implement differentiated teaching and identify students to regularly cycle through flexible groupings in class sizes of 28+. In theory, sure, sounds great. In practice, never going to happen. My kid couldn’t even get a math worksheet with higher level content she was begging her teacher for. “I’m sorry, I have nothing more to give you” is what she was told. Flexible groupings. lol.

Good grief. How many times must this be repeated to you? Flexible grouping does NOT mean multiple groups in one classroom. It means each teacher takes a group for all four core classes. So Mrs. X has advanced language arts, Mrs. Y has grade-level, and Mr. Z has remedial. Then the teachers have different groups for math, science, and social studies. The kids switch for each subject anyway. The kids can cycle into and out of these groups as they improve/need more help. No one is locked into any group or label. And each teacher only has one level to worry about.

I think what they are saying is even with that set up it can vary.

Example:

80 kids in the grade. 3 teachers.

20 kids are above grade level.
20 are on
40 are below.

You only have three teachers. You can’t have a class of 40 kids.

But we're talking about four core classes. Not all of those kids are going to be in the same groups across all subjects. Some of the below grade level kids in language arts might be taking grade level or above math, and vice-versa.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I failed as a parent today! My child (2nd grader) came home crying today because apparently three of her friends are switching schools to go to an AAP center next year. I’m happy with my child’ performance and school, and didn’t even consider pushing for this. But she’s been crying for over an hour about how she is “stupid” and will have no friends next year. She doesn’t even want to see these girls tomorrow because they told her they aren’t friends with her anymore. I had absolutely on idea this is something kids talk about- this is my first kid. Have other parents experienced this ?

I don't believe for a hot minute that this happened.

Not the OP. This scenario happens all the time - you simply don't see it because your kid is in AAP. Those of us with kids in GE have experienced exactly this or very similar with our own kids. It's so typical that you would dismiss it though.

This is why AAP centers need to be a thing of the past.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't you all tired of beating this drum about getting rid of AAP/AAP centers? In every post possible these people run over to dump on the program. Well guess what, even if they scrapped AAP and did flexible groups based on ability instead, the kids would still be able to tell who is in the "smart" group and who isn't and comment on it.

I don't agree. Flexible groups could be moved in/out of over time and kids could be grouped differently for different subjects. Homerooms/ specials would be a complete mix. The fully segregated class system that FCPS has implemented, based on completely subjective measures of 7 year olds does more harm than good. The parents of the 50% of kids who get in don't complain and the other 50% of parents are completely dismissed as bitter. So it persists. But that doesn't make it a good way to educate, even if it helps a lot of kids/ parents feel superior.

+1000
Flexible groupings are absolutely the solution. No one would be permanently labeled anything - kids would cycle into and out of groups as appropriate. It's really unbelievable to me that AAP has persisted as long as it had. Whatever happened to the very small, very selective GT program along with flexible groupings for everyone else?

Have you set foot in an FCPS elementary classroom? 1) 50% of students are not in AAP 2) there’s absolutely no way teachers are going to successfully implement differentiated teaching and identify students to regularly cycle through flexible groupings in class sizes of 28+. In theory, sure, sounds great. In practice, never going to happen. My kid couldn’t even get a math worksheet with higher level content she was begging her teacher for. “I’m sorry, I have nothing more to give you” is what she was told. Flexible groupings. lol.

Good grief. How many times must this be repeated to you? Flexible grouping does NOT mean multiple groups in one classroom. It means each teacher takes a group for all four core classes. So Mrs. X has advanced language arts, Mrs. Y has grade-level, and Mr. Z has remedial. Then the teachers have different groups for math, science, and social studies. The kids switch for each subject anyway. The kids can cycle into and out of these groups as they improve/need more help. No one is locked into any group or label. And each teacher only has one level to worry about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I failed as a parent today! My child (2nd grader) came home crying today because apparently three of her friends are switching schools to go to an AAP center next year. I’m happy with my child’ performance and school, and didn’t even consider pushing for this. But she’s been crying for over an hour about how she is “stupid” and will have no friends next year. She doesn’t even want to see these girls tomorrow because they told her they aren’t friends with her anymore. I had absolutely on idea this is something kids talk about- this is my first kid. Have other parents experienced this ?

I don't believe for a hot minute that this happened.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't you all tired of beating this drum about getting rid of AAP/AAP centers? In every post possible these people run over to dump on the program. Well guess what, even if they scrapped AAP and did flexible groups based on ability instead, the kids would still be able to tell who is in the "smart" group and who isn't and comment on it.

I don't agree. Flexible groups could be moved in/out of over time and kids could be grouped differently for different subjects. Homerooms/ specials would be a complete mix. The fully segregated class system that FCPS has implemented, based on completely subjective measures of 7 year olds does more harm than good. The parents of the 50% of kids who get in don't complain and the other 50% of parents are completely dismissed as bitter. So it persists. But that doesn't make it a good way to educate, even if it helps a lot of kids/ parents feel superior.

+1000
Flexible groupings are absolutely the solution. No one would be permanently labeled anything - kids would cycle into and out of groups as appropriate. It's really unbelievable to me that AAP has persisted as long as it had. Whatever happened to the very small, very selective GT program along with flexible groupings for everyone else?

Have you set foot in an FCPS elementary classroom? 1) 50% of students are not in AAP 2) there’s absolutely no way teachers are going to successfully implement differentiated teaching and identify students to regularly cycle through flexible groupings in class sizes of 28+. In theory, sure, sounds great. In practice, never going to happen. My kid couldn’t even get a math worksheet with higher level content she was begging her teacher for. “I’m sorry, I have nothing more to give you” is what she was told. Flexible groupings. lol.

Good grief. How many times must this be repeated to you? Flexible grouping does NOT mean multiple groups in one classroom. It means each teacher takes a group for all four core classes. So Mrs. X has advanced language arts, Mrs. Y has grade-level, and Mr. Z has remedial. Then the teachers have different groups for math, science, and social studies. The kids switch for each subject anyway. The kids can cycle into and out of these groups as they improve/need more help. No one is locked into any group or label. And each teacher only has one level to worry about.

I think what they are saying is even with that set up it can vary.

Example:

80 kids in the grade. 3 teachers.

20 kids are above grade level.
20 are on
40 are below.

You only have three teachers. You can’t have a class of 40 kids.

I think teachers are smart enough to make this work. Each teacher does the lesson planning for their base level. Doing 2 levels in one classroom isn't usually that hard. It's the planning that takes up the most time. So higher "on level" kids would go to the above grade level class. Kids who are near "On level" could go to the middle class and you would still have a "below" class. Then border line kids who would potentially be shifting wouldn't overburden one class. It worked in the 80's and it can work now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't you all tired of beating this drum about getting rid of AAP/AAP centers? In every post possible these people run over to dump on the program. Well guess what, even if they scrapped AAP and did flexible groups based on ability instead, the kids would still be able to tell who is in the "smart" group and who isn't and comment on it.

I don't agree. Flexible groups could be moved in/out of over time and kids could be grouped differently for different subjects. Homerooms/ specials would be a complete mix. The fully segregated class system that FCPS has implemented, based on completely subjective measures of 7 year olds does more harm than good. The parents of the 50% of kids who get in don't complain and the other 50% of parents are completely dismissed as bitter. So it persists. But that doesn't make it a good way to educate, even if it helps a lot of kids/ parents feel superior.

+1000
Flexible groupings are absolutely the solution. No one would be permanently labeled anything - kids would cycle into and out of groups as appropriate. It's really unbelievable to me that AAP has persisted as long as it had. Whatever happened to the very small, very selective GT program along with flexible groupings for everyone else?

Have you set foot in an FCPS elementary classroom? 1) 50% of students are not in AAP 2) there’s absolutely no way teachers are going to successfully implement differentiated teaching and identify students to regularly cycle through flexible groupings in class sizes of 28+. In theory, sure, sounds great. In practice, never going to happen. My kid couldn’t even get a math worksheet with higher level content she was begging her teacher for. “I’m sorry, I have nothing more to give you” is what she was told. Flexible groupings. lol.

Good grief. How many times must this be repeated to you? Flexible grouping does NOT mean multiple groups in one classroom. It means each teacher takes a group for all four core classes. So Mrs. X has advanced language arts, Mrs. Y has grade-level, and Mr. Z has remedial. Then the teachers have different groups for math, science, and social studies. The kids switch for each subject anyway. The kids can cycle into and out of these groups as they improve/need more help. No one is locked into any group or label. And each teacher only has one level to worry about.

I think what they are saying is even with that set up it can vary.

Example:

80 kids in the grade. 3 teachers.

20 kids are above grade level.
20 are on
40 are below.

You only have three teachers. You can’t have a class of 40 kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I failed as a parent today! My child (2nd grader) came home crying today because apparently three of her friends are switching schools to go to an AAP center next year. I’m happy with my child’ performance and school, and didn’t even consider pushing for this. But she’s been crying for over an hour about how she is “stupid” and will have no friends next year. She doesn’t even want to see these girls tomorrow because they told her they aren’t friends with her anymore. I had absolutely on idea this is something kids talk about- this is my first kid. Have other parents experienced this ?

I don't believe for a hot minute that this happened.

It may not be true in the traditional sense but it is emotionally true so that's the same thing, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I failed as a parent today! My child (2nd grader) came home crying today because apparently three of her friends are switching schools to go to an AAP center next year. I’m happy with my child’ performance and school, and didn’t even consider pushing for this. But she’s been crying for over an hour about how she is “stupid” and will have no friends next year. She doesn’t even want to see these girls tomorrow because they told her they aren’t friends with her anymore. I had absolutely on idea this is something kids talk about- this is my first kid. Have other parents experienced this ?

I don't believe for a hot minute that this happened.

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I failed as a parent today! My child (2nd grader) came home crying today because apparently three of her friends are switching schools to go to an AAP center next year. I’m happy with my child’ performance and school, and didn’t even consider pushing for this. But she’s been crying for over an hour about how she is “stupid” and will have no friends next year. She doesn’t even want to see these girls tomorrow because they told her they aren’t friends with her anymore. I had absolutely on idea this is something kids talk about- this is my first kid. Have other parents experienced this ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't you all tired of beating this drum about getting rid of AAP/AAP centers? In every post possible these people run over to dump on the program. Well guess what, even if they scrapped AAP and did flexible groups based on ability instead, the kids would still be able to tell who is in the "smart" group and who isn't and comment on it.

I don't agree. Flexible groups could be moved in/out of over time and kids could be grouped differently for different subjects. Homerooms/ specials would be a complete mix. The fully segregated class system that FCPS has implemented, based on completely subjective measures of 7 year olds does more harm than good. The parents of the 50% of kids who get in don't complain and the other 50% of parents are completely dismissed as bitter. So it persists. But that doesn't make it a good way to educate, even if it helps a lot of kids/ parents feel superior.

+1000
Flexible groupings are absolutely the solution. No one would be permanently labeled anything - kids would cycle into and out of groups as appropriate. It's really unbelievable to me that AAP has persisted as long as it had. Whatever happened to the very small, very selective GT program along with flexible groupings for everyone else?

Have you set foot in an FCPS elementary classroom? 1) 50% of students are not in AAP 2) there’s absolutely no way teachers are going to successfully implement differentiated teaching and identify students to regularly cycle through flexible groupings in class sizes of 28+. In theory, sure, sounds great. In practice, never going to happen. My kid couldn’t even get a math worksheet with higher level content she was begging her teacher for. “I’m sorry, I have nothing more to give you” is what she was told. Flexible groupings. lol.

Good grief. How many times must this be repeated to you? Flexible grouping does NOT mean multiple groups in one classroom. It means each teacher takes a group for all four core classes. So Mrs. X has advanced language arts, Mrs. Y has grade-level, and Mr. Z has remedial. Then the teachers have different groups for math, science, and social studies. The kids switch for each subject anyway. The kids can cycle into and out of these groups as they improve/need more help. No one is locked into any group or label. And each teacher only has one level to worry about.

I think what they are saying is even with that set up it can vary.

Example:

80 kids in the grade. 3 teachers.

20 kids are above grade level.
20 are on
40 are below.

You only have three teachers. You can’t have a class of 40 kids.

I think teachers are smart enough to make this work. Each teacher does the lesson planning for their base level. Doing 2 levels in one classroom isn't usually that hard. It's the planning that takes up the most time. So higher "on level" kids would go to the above grade level class. Kids who are near "On level" could go to the middle class and you would still have a "below" class. Then border line kids who would potentially be shifting wouldn't overburden one class. It worked in the 80's and it can work now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't you all tired of beating this drum about getting rid of AAP/AAP centers? In every post possible these people run over to dump on the program. Well guess what, even if they scrapped AAP and did flexible groups based on ability instead, the kids would still be able to tell who is in the "smart" group and who isn't and comment on it.

I don't agree. Flexible groups could be moved in/out of over time and kids could be grouped differently for different subjects. Homerooms/ specials would be a complete mix. The fully segregated class system that FCPS has implemented, based on completely subjective measures of 7 year olds does more harm than good. The parents of the 50% of kids who get in don't complain and the other 50% of parents are completely dismissed as bitter. So it persists. But that doesn't make it a good way to educate, even if it helps a lot of kids/ parents feel superior.

+1000
Flexible groupings are absolutely the solution. No one would be permanently labeled anything - kids would cycle into and out of groups as appropriate. It's really unbelievable to me that AAP has persisted as long as it had. Whatever happened to the very small, very selective GT program along with flexible groupings for everyone else?

Have you set foot in an FCPS elementary classroom? 1) 50% of students are not in AAP 2) there’s absolutely no way teachers are going to successfully implement differentiated teaching and identify students to regularly cycle through flexible groupings in class sizes of 28+. In theory, sure, sounds great. In practice, never going to happen. My kid couldn’t even get a math worksheet with higher level content she was begging her teacher for. “I’m sorry, I have nothing more to give you” is what she was told. Flexible groupings. lol.

Good grief. How many times must this be repeated to you? Flexible grouping does NOT mean multiple groups in one classroom. It means each teacher takes a group for all four core classes. So Mrs. X has advanced language arts, Mrs. Y has grade-level, and Mr. Z has remedial. Then the teachers have different groups for math, science, and social studies. The kids switch for each subject anyway. The kids can cycle into and out of these groups as they improve/need more help. No one is locked into any group or label. And each teacher only has one level to worry about.

I think what they are saying is even with that set up it can vary.

Example:

80 kids in the grade. 3 teachers.

20 kids are above grade level.
20 are on
40 are below.

You only have three teachers. You can’t have a class of 40 kids.

I think teachers are smart enough to make this work. Each teacher does the lesson planning for their base level. Doing 2 levels in one classroom isn't usually that hard. It's the planning that takes up the most time. So higher "on level" kids would go to the above grade level class. Kids who are near "On level" could go to the middle class and you would still have a "below" class. Then border line kids who would potentially be shifting wouldn't overburden one class. It worked in the 80's and it can work now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't you all tired of beating this drum about getting rid of AAP/AAP centers? In every post possible these people run over to dump on the program. Well guess what, even if they scrapped AAP and did flexible groups based on ability instead, the kids would still be able to tell who is in the "smart" group and who isn't and comment on it.

I don't agree. Flexible groups could be moved in/out of over time and kids could be grouped differently for different subjects. Homerooms/ specials would be a complete mix. The fully segregated class system that FCPS has implemented, based on completely subjective measures of 7 year olds does more harm than good. The parents of the 50% of kids who get in don't complain and the other 50% of parents are completely dismissed as bitter. So it persists. But that doesn't make it a good way to educate, even if it helps a lot of kids/ parents feel superior.

+1000
Flexible groupings are absolutely the solution. No one would be permanently labeled anything - kids would cycle into and out of groups as appropriate. It's really unbelievable to me that AAP has persisted as long as it had. Whatever happened to the very small, very selective GT program along with flexible groupings for everyone else?

Have you set foot in an FCPS elementary classroom? 1) 50% of students are not in AAP 2) there’s absolutely no way teachers are going to successfully implement differentiated teaching and identify students to regularly cycle through flexible groupings in class sizes of 28+. In theory, sure, sounds great. In practice, never going to happen. My kid couldn’t even get a math worksheet with higher level content she was begging her teacher for. “I’m sorry, I have nothing more to give you” is what she was told. Flexible groupings. lol.

Good grief. How many times must this be repeated to you? Flexible grouping does NOT mean multiple groups in one classroom. It means each teacher takes a group for all four core classes. So Mrs. X has advanced language arts, Mrs. Y has grade-level, and Mr. Z has remedial. Then the teachers have different groups for math, science, and social studies. The kids switch for each subject anyway. The kids can cycle into and out of these groups as they improve/need more help. No one is locked into any group or label. And each teacher only has one level to worry about.

I think what they are saying is even with that set up it can vary.

Example:

80 kids in the grade. 3 teachers.

20 kids are above grade level.
20 are on
40 are below.

You only have three teachers. You can’t have a class of 40 kids.

I think teachers are smart enough to make this work. Each teacher does the lesson planning for their base level. Doing 2 levels in one classroom isn't usually that hard. It's the planning that takes up the most time. So higher "on level" kids would go to the above grade level class. Kids who are near "On level" could go to the middle class and you would still have a "below" class. Then border line kids who would potentially be shifting wouldn't overburden one class. It worked in the 80's and it can work now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't you all tired of beating this drum about getting rid of AAP/AAP centers? In every post possible these people run over to dump on the program. Well guess what, even if they scrapped AAP and did flexible groups based on ability instead, the kids would still be able to tell who is in the "smart" group and who isn't and comment on it.

I don't agree. Flexible groups could be moved in/out of over time and kids could be grouped differently for different subjects. Homerooms/ specials would be a complete mix. The fully segregated class system that FCPS has implemented, based on completely subjective measures of 7 year olds does more harm than good. The parents of the 50% of kids who get in don't complain and the other 50% of parents are completely dismissed as bitter. So it persists. But that doesn't make it a good way to educate, even if it helps a lot of kids/ parents feel superior.

+1000
Flexible groupings are absolutely the solution. No one would be permanently labeled anything - kids would cycle into and out of groups as appropriate. It's really unbelievable to me that AAP has persisted as long as it had. Whatever happened to the very small, very selective GT program along with flexible groupings for everyone else?

Have you set foot in an FCPS elementary classroom? 1) 50% of students are not in AAP 2) there’s absolutely no way teachers are going to successfully implement differentiated teaching and identify students to regularly cycle through flexible groupings in class sizes of 28+. In theory, sure, sounds great. In practice, never going to happen. My kid couldn’t even get a math worksheet with higher level content she was begging her teacher for. “I’m sorry, I have nothing more to give you” is what she was told. Flexible groupings. lol.

Good grief. How many times must this be repeated to you? Flexible grouping does NOT mean multiple groups in one classroom. It means each teacher takes a group for all four core classes. So Mrs. X has advanced language arts, Mrs. Y has grade-level, and Mr. Z has remedial. Then the teachers have different groups for math, science, and social studies. The kids switch for each subject anyway. The kids can cycle into and out of these groups as they improve/need more help. No one is locked into any group or label. And each teacher only has one level to worry about.

I think what they are saying is even with that set up it can vary.

Example:

80 kids in the grade. 3 teachers.

20 kids are above grade level.
20 are on
40 are below.

You only have three teachers. You can’t have a class of 40 kids.