OTOH, I have out of morbid curiosity been following the threads on kids trying to test in to AAP (I think in VA, their version of G&T that seems to start in 3rd grade), and it does sound like a bunch of white folks gaming the system - people are being told to take the WISC if they had not before and reapply, the names of certain people who administer the tests are being repeated over and over again, and those tests are expensive and if the school system does not pay for them there is a problem from the get go. Furthermore, people are posting their kids scores and grades and accepted or rejected, and it seems very arbitrary, even to those parents whose kids got accepted. I know a lot of people do exaggerate on DCUM, having just been called a fake poster, but these parents who post high scores and good grades and then "rejected" where other parents commiserate, just don't seem to have much reason to lie.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: Yea, we're too picky, snooty, whatever.
Good, it sounds like you've identified the root of the problem.
I assure you that s/he hasn't identified it. The root of the problem is parents like you making do instead of demanding what's healthy and normal a few miles away, across the MD and VA lines: tracking to meet the academic needs of all the middle school kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
How would you know anything about the relative benefits of offering a content-rich curriculum? Are you an educator? Have you read any of the studies about urban schools and districts that use CK?
I've taught CK for several years to students from grades 1 through 8. I routinely run into my former students. They never fail to tell me how much they gained from the things we studied. Not one student or parent has told me, "gee it was such a waste of time to study the Renaissance, or read A Midsummer Night's Dream."
As for your high-achieving child, mazel tov.
Anonymous wrote:Hmmm. 11:08--while I do not presume to know about how all the students at Latin are tested, I do know for a fact that they sometimes do oral testing instead of essay tests for their ELL learners---which is actually a good way to determine whether an ELL student is comprehending the content being taught. So I would not necessarily make the broad generalization that Latin orally tests "low performing" kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
How would you know anything about the relative benefits of offering a content-rich curriculum? Are you an educator? Have you read any of the studies about urban schools and districts that use CK?
I've taught CK for several years to students from grades 1 through 8. I routinely run into my former students. They never fail to tell me how much they gained from the things we studied. Not one student or parent has told me, "gee it was such a waste of time to study the Renaissance, or read A Midsummer Night's Dream."
As for your high-achieving child, mazel tov.
Anonymous wrote:Read studies about K-12 curricula.Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Now tell me why nearly one-quarter of the kids still can't pass proficiency tests so easy that my 3rd grader scored 100% on the DC-CAS.
Who cares?