Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://us7.campaign-archive.com/?e=%5BUNIQID%5D&id=973608ef66&u=12119a80f9eb7a7322f4902ae

Accelerated Middle School Math Enrollment Declines Post-Covid

The latest SOL release sheds light on the question of how COVID has impacted accelerated math. Using SOL test takers as a proxy for course enrollment, the share of middle school students taking Algebra I fell sharply in Arlington (APS), Fairfax (FCPS), and Loudoun Counties (LCPS) in 2021-22. (Both 7th and 8th grade Algebra I are considered accelerated math courses.) To summarize:
The share of 7th graders taking the Algebra I SOL fell by 8 percentage points in both APS and FCPS and 11 percentage points in LCPS;
The share of 8th graders taking the Algebra I SOL fell by 11 percentage points in both APS and FCPS and 8 percentage points in LCPS;
APS continues to lag FCPS and LCPS in overall middle school math acceleration.

The drop in the 2021-22 accelerated math share was not unexpected since prior years’ math classes were not able to cover a full year’s content amidst the fall-out from COVID. Parents and APS opted to reduce student acceleration as a way of remediating learning loss. Some of the drop in the 8th grade Algebra I share may be recouped in 2022-23 given a likely inflow of students who opted out of 7th grade Algebra I last year.

However, the key question is what happens beyond that. Will the accelerated math share return to its pre-COVID levels as students rebuild their math base or will the share continue to trend lower amidst calls from Stanford Education Professor Jo Boaler and others to “go deep, not fast”?

Is this APE propaganda?

Now they are complaining when APS raises the bar?

They are so full of crap.

They have to get in their digs. They add nothing. Such a toxic group.

We were talking about block scheduling not tiresome APE Covid gripes. Try to ignore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google benefits of block scheduling. Teachers are NOT using it as a study hall.

Haha I can Google benefits of Lucy Caulkins too, look how that turned out.

You guys are idiots. Seriously. Block scheduling has been around since the 90s. We had it in my high school. Grow up.

Interesting, and yet people have been saying local school systems have been in decline since the 90s…

No. “They” haven’t been saying that.

Yeah, they've been saying it since the 2010's. Especially regarding APS.

APS isn’t in decline. You’re all so sheltered that you have no idea what a bad school system actually looks like. None of the ones in this entire metro area are bad. Not even close. The bulk of complaints about schools here, whether it’s APS, FCPS, MCPS, are just because too many people are overstretched on their house and angry they paid $900k for a shack inside the beltway and that pinch makes them feel like they’re entitled to something they were never going to get - a private school experience in a public school system.

The schools are good. You’re angry at what you spent on a house to get into those schools. But it doesn’t make them bad schools. Your issue isn’t block scheduling, it’s your mortgage

They didn't say they're "bad." They said they're "in decline." A good school system can be in decline and still be better relative to other school districts. It means they aren't as good as they used to be. And I don't care about ratings relative to NYC Public Schools or Chicago or even DC. I care about the school system my kids are in; and if it can be better, then people should push it to be better and call it out when they believe it is heading in the wrong direction. Why should we just accept whatever we have as long as it's still better than elsewhere?

Also, my buying a house has nothing to do with my dissatisfaction with certain things about APS. Not everyone "spent on a house to get into those schools." Maybe those who have more money and spent more money on their homes have a tendency to be more critical of APS; but don't you think it might be that they have higher expectations based on APS' reputation as well as their own personal experiences with APS, perhaps in comparison to their own educational experiences - as opposed to those of the poorer people in the community coming from far inferior education systems and therefore finding anything APS offers to be superior to where they came from? THOSE are the people who "spent on a house" to get their kids into a good school system.

There is nothing wrong with holding a school system to higher standards.

APS was definitely much better back in the 90s and early 2000s; we moved here in 2005 with a baby thinking it was for good schools.

However, back then APS was dealing with declining enrollment, meanwhile the county was getting wealthier with the housing boom and growth. They introduced IB into WL to attract students from Yorktown which at that time was comparable to Mclean in performance, and getting to HB was so much easier because there simply were fewer students interested in an alternative program.

Fast forward 15 years, and county student population exploded meanwhile the county coffers have declined; they blew a TON of money in the 2010s building SMALLER new high schools and the marque $$$$ Heights building. ATS & HB is overrun with applicants who are simply trying to escape the overcrowsed high schools rather than actually interested in the alternative program. The county was sued for equity, and so has invested a lot of effort on improving equity and their approach has to been to remove things like differentiation at younger grades and eliminate homework; bringing everyone down to same performance rather than improving from those who are behind.

Compounded with AHA lobbyists who are pushing more and more housing with more high need students, it is a different place.

Whether block scheduling which also started in the time was a factor is hard to know, since so much about the system has changed in last 20 years.

PP here. Yes, exactly. Some bad curriculum/instructional choices and, worst of all, lowering of expectations and standards in the name of equity. A better school system would raise the expectations and standards for the lowest performing, not lower them for the high achieving.

I will note regarding block scheduling - to get back to the original topic - that another advantage to block scheduling is that a student who is out sick one day does not miss every single class, just half. And when a student is out for a week (like mine is now due to a positive COVID test - ugh!), they only miss each class a few times rather 5 times.

There are other schedules where classes don't meet every day. Some schedules have classes meet four times a week, with off one day, with normal class length of 50 or so minutes.

Do you feel that your child misses less when they're out sick for a week under block? In theory, block and regular classes should cover the same content each week so you'd miss a comparable amount under either system. If they use part of blocks for independent work, however, then an absent student would miss less new content with blocks, but that may not be a good thing in the big picture since it means they get less new weekly content under blocks.

Exactly, if they are missing less content in a week when they are out on block, that means THERE IS LESS CONTENT IN A WEEK.

I actually think block can be worse when you're out sick. If you're out one day and it's the day you have math, you have missed double the math content than if you were just out for one day.

But overall, you have more time to get caught up - in any class.
Plus, since everything is online and assignments are through Canvas, students have immediate access to their assignments and can work on them before returning (if they're not too sick to do anything, of course) rather than waiting until the next time their class meets after returning.

I think it's better overall to miss one block class than 2 regular classes. If the student is missing out on group work from that one block class day, the teacher can make accommodations for that if needed. IMO, that's better than missing two days' worth of lectures.

Other schedules with classes meeting 4x/week really isn't much better than the 5x/week scenario. But with block scheduling, even if the student is out a whole week, they are missing some of their classes only twice and others 3 times instead of missing all classes 5 times.

But yes, I think math and science classes could be the most challenging to miss under the block schedule; though I'd argue it's not any worse than missing those classes 5 days in a row under traditional scheduling, and I still think better. I'll have to ask my child what they think when they've returned to school.

The concern with blocks is with what you describe here:
"If the student is missing out on group work from that one block class day, the teacher can make accommodations for that if needed. IMO, that's better than missing two days' worth of lectures."
Under block, there's group work but regular schedule there's two days of instruction.

Also, I think PP's comment about block math classes being worse to miss relates to missing one day as opposed to five. If you miss math one day in blocks, you've lost a bigger share of that week's class time than under a regular schedule.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's absolutely awful. Kids cannot focus for that long. Even adults have a hard time in meetings that long. I assume they do it because it's easier for scheduling and they do not really care about what's best for students.

Nonsense. What is absolutely awful is the inability of teenagers and adults to focus for a 90-minute class or meeting! That's ridiculous! In today's instant and constant stimulation society, I think it's even more important for schools to condition kids to have better attention spans than 45 minutes. There's a difference between being bored and therefore finding yourself restless and daydreaming in a poorly conducted, inefficient meeting and actually being unable to pay attention or engage in something for 90 minutes. Those students who absolutely can't do that should have IEPs and those IEPs seem to have a standard accommodation of "movement breaks" and such.
Besides, it isn't 90 straight, non-stop minutes of a teacher talking at you. There is discussion and work time as well, just like in most 45-minute classes. There are segments for different activities and therefore shifting of focus within that hour and a half. I'll bet they can all watch a movie for 90 minutes without issue - and then be upset they didn't have time to finish watching it!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google benefits of block scheduling. Teachers are NOT using it as a study hall.

Haha I can Google benefits of Lucy Caulkins too, look how that turned out.

You guys are idiots. Seriously. Block scheduling has been around since the 90s. We had it in my high school. Grow up.

Interesting, and yet people have been saying local school systems have been in decline since the 90s…

No. “They” haven’t been saying that.

Yeah, they've been saying it since the 2010's. Especially regarding APS.

APS isn’t in decline. You’re all so sheltered that you have no idea what a bad school system actually looks like. None of the ones in this entire metro area are bad. Not even close. The bulk of complaints about schools here, whether it’s APS, FCPS, MCPS, are just because too many people are overstretched on their house and angry they paid $900k for a shack inside the beltway and that pinch makes them feel like they’re entitled to something they were never going to get - a private school experience in a public school system.

The schools are good. You’re angry at what you spent on a house to get into those schools. But it doesn’t make them bad schools. Your issue isn’t block scheduling, it’s your mortgage

They didn't say they're "bad." They said they're "in decline." A good school system can be in decline and still be better relative to other school districts. It means they aren't as good as they used to be. And I don't care about ratings relative to NYC Public Schools or Chicago or even DC. I care about the school system my kids are in; and if it can be better, then people should push it to be better and call it out when they believe it is heading in the wrong direction. Why should we just accept whatever we have as long as it's still better than elsewhere?

Also, my buying a house has nothing to do with my dissatisfaction with certain things about APS. Not everyone "spent on a house to get into those schools." Maybe those who have more money and spent more money on their homes have a tendency to be more critical of APS; but don't you think it might be that they have higher expectations based on APS' reputation as well as their own personal experiences with APS, perhaps in comparison to their own educational experiences - as opposed to those of the poorer people in the community coming from far inferior education systems and therefore finding anything APS offers to be superior to where they came from? THOSE are the people who "spent on a house" to get their kids into a good school system.

There is nothing wrong with holding a school system to higher standards.

APS was definitely much better back in the 90s and early 2000s; we moved here in 2005 with a baby thinking it was for good schools.

However, back then APS was dealing with declining enrollment, meanwhile the county was getting wealthier with the housing boom and growth. They introduced IB into WL to attract students from Yorktown which at that time was comparable to Mclean in performance, and getting to HB was so much easier because there simply were fewer students interested in an alternative program.

Fast forward 15 years, and county student population exploded meanwhile the county coffers have declined; they blew a TON of money in the 2010s building SMALLER new high schools and the marque $$$$ Heights building. ATS & HB is overrun with applicants who are simply trying to escape the overcrowsed high schools rather than actually interested in the alternative program. The county was sued for equity, and so has invested a lot of effort on improving equity and their approach has to been to remove things like differentiation at younger grades and eliminate homework; bringing everyone down to same performance rather than improving from those who are behind.

Compounded with AHA lobbyists who are pushing more and more housing with more high need students, it is a different place.

Whether block scheduling which also started in the time was a factor is hard to know, since so much about the system has changed in last 20 years.

PP here. Yes, exactly. Some bad curriculum/instructional choices and, worst of all, lowering of expectations and standards in the name of equity. A better school system would raise the expectations and standards for the lowest performing, not lower them for the high achieving.

I will note regarding block scheduling - to get back to the original topic - that another advantage to block scheduling is that a student who is out sick one day does not miss every single class, just half. And when a student is out for a week (like mine is now due to a positive COVID test - ugh!), they only miss each class a few times rather 5 times.

There are other schedules where classes don't meet every day. Some schedules have classes meet four times a week, with off one day, with normal class length of 50 or so minutes.

Do you feel that your child misses less when they're out sick for a week under block? In theory, block and regular classes should cover the same content each week so you'd miss a comparable amount under either system. If they use part of blocks for independent work, however, then an absent student would miss less new content with blocks, but that may not be a good thing in the big picture since it means they get less new weekly content under blocks.

Exactly, if they are missing less content in a week when they are out on block, that means THERE IS LESS CONTENT IN A WEEK.

I actually think block can be worse when you're out sick. If you're out one day and it's the day you have math, you have missed double the math content than if you were just out for one day.

But overall, you have more time to get caught up - in any class.
Plus, since everything is online and assignments are through Canvas, students have immediate access to their assignments and can work on them before returning (if they're not too sick to do anything, of course) rather than waiting until the next time their class meets after returning.

I think it's better overall to miss one block class than 2 regular classes. If the student is missing out on group work from that one block class day, the teacher can make accommodations for that if needed. IMO, that's better than missing two days' worth of lectures.

Other schedules with classes meeting 4x/week really isn't much better than the 5x/week scenario. But with block scheduling, even if the student is out a whole week, they are missing some of their classes only twice and others 3 times instead of missing all classes 5 times.

But yes, I think math and science classes could be the most challenging to miss under the block schedule; though I'd argue it's not any worse than missing those classes 5 days in a row under traditional scheduling, and I still think better. I'll have to ask my child what they think when they've returned to school.

Anonymous wrote:It's absolutely awful. Kids cannot focus for that long. Even adults have a hard time in meetings that long. I assume they do it because it's easier for scheduling and they do not really care about what's best for students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google benefits of block scheduling. Teachers are NOT using it as a study hall.

Haha I can Google benefits of Lucy Caulkins too, look how that turned out.

You guys are idiots. Seriously. Block scheduling has been around since the 90s. We had it in my high school. Grow up.

Interesting, and yet people have been saying local school systems have been in decline since the 90s…

No. “They” haven’t been saying that.

Yeah, they've been saying it since the 2010's. Especially regarding APS.

APS isn’t in decline. You’re all so sheltered that you have no idea what a bad school system actually looks like. None of the ones in this entire metro area are bad. Not even close. The bulk of complaints about schools here, whether it’s APS, FCPS, MCPS, are just because too many people are overstretched on their house and angry they paid $900k for a shack inside the beltway and that pinch makes them feel like they’re entitled to something they were never going to get - a private school experience in a public school system.

The schools are good. You’re angry at what you spent on a house to get into those schools. But it doesn’t make them bad schools. Your issue isn’t block scheduling, it’s your mortgage

They didn't say they're "bad." They said they're "in decline." A good school system can be in decline and still be better relative to other school districts. It means they aren't as good as they used to be. And I don't care about ratings relative to NYC Public Schools or Chicago or even DC. I care about the school system my kids are in; and if it can be better, then people should push it to be better and call it out when they believe it is heading in the wrong direction. Why should we just accept whatever we have as long as it's still better than elsewhere?

Also, my buying a house has nothing to do with my dissatisfaction with certain things about APS. Not everyone "spent on a house to get into those schools." Maybe those who have more money and spent more money on their homes have a tendency to be more critical of APS; but don't you think it might be that they have higher expectations based on APS' reputation as well as their own personal experiences with APS, perhaps in comparison to their own educational experiences - as opposed to those of the poorer people in the community coming from far inferior education systems and therefore finding anything APS offers to be superior to where they came from? THOSE are the people who "spent on a house" to get their kids into a good school system.

There is nothing wrong with holding a school system to higher standards.

APS was definitely much better back in the 90s and early 2000s; we moved here in 2005 with a baby thinking it was for good schools.

However, back then APS was dealing with declining enrollment, meanwhile the county was getting wealthier with the housing boom and growth. They introduced IB into WL to attract students from Yorktown which at that time was comparable to Mclean in performance, and getting to HB was so much easier because there simply were fewer students interested in an alternative program.

Fast forward 15 years, and county student population exploded meanwhile the county coffers have declined; they blew a TON of money in the 2010s building SMALLER new high schools and the marque $$$$ Heights building. ATS & HB is overrun with applicants who are simply trying to escape the overcrowsed high schools rather than actually interested in the alternative program. The county was sued for equity, and so has invested a lot of effort on improving equity and their approach has to been to remove things like differentiation at younger grades and eliminate homework; bringing everyone down to same performance rather than improving from those who are behind.

Compounded with AHA lobbyists who are pushing more and more housing with more high need students, it is a different place.

Whether block scheduling which also started in the time was a factor is hard to know, since so much about the system has changed in last 20 years.

PP here. Yes, exactly. Some bad curriculum/instructional choices and, worst of all, lowering of expectations and standards in the name of equity. A better school system would raise the expectations and standards for the lowest performing, not lower them for the high achieving.

I will note regarding block scheduling - to get back to the original topic - that another advantage to block scheduling is that a student who is out sick one day does not miss every single class, just half. And when a student is out for a week (like mine is now due to a positive COVID test - ugh!), they only miss each class a few times rather 5 times.

There are other schedules where classes don't meet every day. Some schedules have classes meet four times a week, with off one day, with normal class length of 50 or so minutes.

Do you feel that your child misses less when they're out sick for a week under block? In theory, block and regular classes should cover the same content each week so you'd miss a comparable amount under either system. If they use part of blocks for independent work, however, then an absent student would miss less new content with blocks, but that may not be a good thing in the big picture since it means they get less new weekly content under blocks.

Exactly, if they are missing less content in a week when they are out on block, that means THERE IS LESS CONTENT IN A WEEK.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google benefits of block scheduling. Teachers are NOT using it as a study hall.

Haha I can Google benefits of Lucy Caulkins too, look how that turned out.

You guys are idiots. Seriously. Block scheduling has been around since the 90s. We had it in my high school. Grow up.

Interesting, and yet people have been saying local school systems have been in decline since the 90s…

No. “They” haven’t been saying that.

Yeah, they've been saying it since the 2010's. Especially regarding APS.

APS isn’t in decline. You’re all so sheltered that you have no idea what a bad school system actually looks like. None of the ones in this entire metro area are bad. Not even close. The bulk of complaints about schools here, whether it’s APS, FCPS, MCPS, are just because too many people are overstretched on their house and angry they paid $900k for a shack inside the beltway and that pinch makes them feel like they’re entitled to something they were never going to get - a private school experience in a public school system.

The schools are good. You’re angry at what you spent on a house to get into those schools. But it doesn’t make them bad schools. Your issue isn’t block scheduling, it’s your mortgage

They didn't say they're "bad." They said they're "in decline." A good school system can be in decline and still be better relative to other school districts. It means they aren't as good as they used to be. And I don't care about ratings relative to NYC Public Schools or Chicago or even DC. I care about the school system my kids are in; and if it can be better, then people should push it to be better and call it out when they believe it is heading in the wrong direction. Why should we just accept whatever we have as long as it's still better than elsewhere?

Also, my buying a house has nothing to do with my dissatisfaction with certain things about APS. Not everyone "spent on a house to get into those schools." Maybe those who have more money and spent more money on their homes have a tendency to be more critical of APS; but don't you think it might be that they have higher expectations based on APS' reputation as well as their own personal experiences with APS, perhaps in comparison to their own educational experiences - as opposed to those of the poorer people in the community coming from far inferior education systems and therefore finding anything APS offers to be superior to where they came from? THOSE are the people who "spent on a house" to get their kids into a good school system.

There is nothing wrong with holding a school system to higher standards.

APS was definitely much better back in the 90s and early 2000s; we moved here in 2005 with a baby thinking it was for good schools.

However, back then APS was dealing with declining enrollment, meanwhile the county was getting wealthier with the housing boom and growth. They introduced IB into WL to attract students from Yorktown which at that time was comparable to Mclean in performance, and getting to HB was so much easier because there simply were fewer students interested in an alternative program.

Fast forward 15 years, and county student population exploded meanwhile the county coffers have declined; they blew a TON of money in the 2010s building SMALLER new high schools and the marque $$$$ Heights building. ATS & HB is overrun with applicants who are simply trying to escape the overcrowsed high schools rather than actually interested in the alternative program. The county was sued for equity, and so has invested a lot of effort on improving equity and their approach has to been to remove things like differentiation at younger grades and eliminate homework; bringing everyone down to same performance rather than improving from those who are behind.

Compounded with AHA lobbyists who are pushing more and more housing with more high need students, it is a different place.

Whether block scheduling which also started in the time was a factor is hard to know, since so much about the system has changed in last 20 years.

PP here. Yes, exactly. Some bad curriculum/instructional choices and, worst of all, lowering of expectations and standards in the name of equity. A better school system would raise the expectations and standards for the lowest performing, not lower them for the high achieving.

I will note regarding block scheduling - to get back to the original topic - that another advantage to block scheduling is that a student who is out sick one day does not miss every single class, just half. And when a student is out for a week (like mine is now due to a positive COVID test - ugh!), they only miss each class a few times rather 5 times.

There are other schedules where classes don't meet every day. Some schedules have classes meet four times a week, with off one day, with normal class length of 50 or so minutes.

Do you feel that your child misses less when they're out sick for a week under block? In theory, block and regular classes should cover the same content each week so you'd miss a comparable amount under either system. If they use part of blocks for independent work, however, then an absent student would miss less new content with blocks, but that may not be a good thing in the big picture since it means they get less new weekly content under blocks.

Exactly, if they are missing less content in a week when they are out on block, that means THERE IS LESS CONTENT IN A WEEK.

I actually think block can be worse when you're out sick. If you're out one day and it's the day you have math, you have missed double the math content than if you were just out for one day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google benefits of block scheduling. Teachers are NOT using it as a study hall.

Haha I can Google benefits of Lucy Caulkins too, look how that turned out.

You guys are idiots. Seriously. Block scheduling has been around since the 90s. We had it in my high school. Grow up.

Interesting, and yet people have been saying local school systems have been in decline since the 90s…

No. “They” haven’t been saying that.

Yeah, they've been saying it since the 2010's. Especially regarding APS.

APS isn’t in decline. You’re all so sheltered that you have no idea what a bad school system actually looks like. None of the ones in this entire metro area are bad. Not even close. The bulk of complaints about schools here, whether it’s APS, FCPS, MCPS, are just because too many people are overstretched on their house and angry they paid $900k for a shack inside the beltway and that pinch makes them feel like they’re entitled to something they were never going to get - a private school experience in a public school system.

The schools are good. You’re angry at what you spent on a house to get into those schools. But it doesn’t make them bad schools. Your issue isn’t block scheduling, it’s your mortgage

They didn't say they're "bad." They said they're "in decline." A good school system can be in decline and still be better relative to other school districts. It means they aren't as good as they used to be. And I don't care about ratings relative to NYC Public Schools or Chicago or even DC. I care about the school system my kids are in; and if it can be better, then people should push it to be better and call it out when they believe it is heading in the wrong direction. Why should we just accept whatever we have as long as it's still better than elsewhere?

Also, my buying a house has nothing to do with my dissatisfaction with certain things about APS. Not everyone "spent on a house to get into those schools." Maybe those who have more money and spent more money on their homes have a tendency to be more critical of APS; but don't you think it might be that they have higher expectations based on APS' reputation as well as their own personal experiences with APS, perhaps in comparison to their own educational experiences - as opposed to those of the poorer people in the community coming from far inferior education systems and therefore finding anything APS offers to be superior to where they came from? THOSE are the people who "spent on a house" to get their kids into a good school system.

There is nothing wrong with holding a school system to higher standards.

APS was definitely much better back in the 90s and early 2000s; we moved here in 2005 with a baby thinking it was for good schools.

However, back then APS was dealing with declining enrollment, meanwhile the county was getting wealthier with the housing boom and growth. They introduced IB into WL to attract students from Yorktown which at that time was comparable to Mclean in performance, and getting to HB was so much easier because there simply were fewer students interested in an alternative program.

Fast forward 15 years, and county student population exploded meanwhile the county coffers have declined; they blew a TON of money in the 2010s building SMALLER new high schools and the marque $$$$ Heights building. ATS & HB is overrun with applicants who are simply trying to escape the overcrowsed high schools rather than actually interested in the alternative program. The county was sued for equity, and so has invested a lot of effort on improving equity and their approach has to been to remove things like differentiation at younger grades and eliminate homework; bringing everyone down to same performance rather than improving from those who are behind.

Compounded with AHA lobbyists who are pushing more and more housing with more high need students, it is a different place.

Whether block scheduling which also started in the time was a factor is hard to know, since so much about the system has changed in last 20 years.

PP here. Yes, exactly. Some bad curriculum/instructional choices and, worst of all, lowering of expectations and standards in the name of equity. A better school system would raise the expectations and standards for the lowest performing, not lower them for the high achieving.

I will note regarding block scheduling - to get back to the original topic - that another advantage to block scheduling is that a student who is out sick one day does not miss every single class, just half. And when a student is out for a week (like mine is now due to a positive COVID test - ugh!), they only miss each class a few times rather 5 times.

There are other schedules where classes don't meet every day. Some schedules have classes meet four times a week, with off one day, with normal class length of 50 or so minutes.

Do you feel that your child misses less when they're out sick for a week under block? In theory, block and regular classes should cover the same content each week so you'd miss a comparable amount under either system. If they use part of blocks for independent work, however, then an absent student would miss less new content with blocks, but that may not be a good thing in the big picture since it means they get less new weekly content under blocks.

Exactly, if they are missing less content in a week when they are out on block, that means THERE IS LESS CONTENT IN A WEEK.

I actually think block can be worse when you're out sick. If you're out one day and it's the day you have math, you have missed double the math content than if you were just out for one day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google benefits of block scheduling. Teachers are NOT using it as a study hall.

Haha I can Google benefits of Lucy Caulkins too, look how that turned out.

You guys are idiots. Seriously. Block scheduling has been around since the 90s. We had it in my high school. Grow up.

Interesting, and yet people have been saying local school systems have been in decline since the 90s…

No. “They” haven’t been saying that.

Yeah, they've been saying it since the 2010's. Especially regarding APS.

APS isn’t in decline. You’re all so sheltered that you have no idea what a bad school system actually looks like. None of the ones in this entire metro area are bad. Not even close. The bulk of complaints about schools here, whether it’s APS, FCPS, MCPS, are just because too many people are overstretched on their house and angry they paid $900k for a shack inside the beltway and that pinch makes them feel like they’re entitled to something they were never going to get - a private school experience in a public school system.

The schools are good. You’re angry at what you spent on a house to get into those schools. But it doesn’t make them bad schools. Your issue isn’t block scheduling, it’s your mortgage

They didn't say they're "bad." They said they're "in decline." A good school system can be in decline and still be better relative to other school districts. It means they aren't as good as they used to be. And I don't care about ratings relative to NYC Public Schools or Chicago or even DC. I care about the school system my kids are in; and if it can be better, then people should push it to be better and call it out when they believe it is heading in the wrong direction. Why should we just accept whatever we have as long as it's still better than elsewhere?

Also, my buying a house has nothing to do with my dissatisfaction with certain things about APS. Not everyone "spent on a house to get into those schools." Maybe those who have more money and spent more money on their homes have a tendency to be more critical of APS; but don't you think it might be that they have higher expectations based on APS' reputation as well as their own personal experiences with APS, perhaps in comparison to their own educational experiences - as opposed to those of the poorer people in the community coming from far inferior education systems and therefore finding anything APS offers to be superior to where they came from? THOSE are the people who "spent on a house" to get their kids into a good school system.

There is nothing wrong with holding a school system to higher standards.

APS was definitely much better back in the 90s and early 2000s; we moved here in 2005 with a baby thinking it was for good schools.

However, back then APS was dealing with declining enrollment, meanwhile the county was getting wealthier with the housing boom and growth. They introduced IB into WL to attract students from Yorktown which at that time was comparable to Mclean in performance, and getting to HB was so much easier because there simply were fewer students interested in an alternative program.

Fast forward 15 years, and county student population exploded meanwhile the county coffers have declined; they blew a TON of money in the 2010s building SMALLER new high schools and the marque $$$$ Heights building. ATS & HB is overrun with applicants who are simply trying to escape the overcrowsed high schools rather than actually interested in the alternative program. The county was sued for equity, and so has invested a lot of effort on improving equity and their approach has to been to remove things like differentiation at younger grades and eliminate homework; bringing everyone down to same performance rather than improving from those who are behind.

Compounded with AHA lobbyists who are pushing more and more housing with more high need students, it is a different place.

Whether block scheduling which also started in the time was a factor is hard to know, since so much about the system has changed in last 20 years.

PP here. Yes, exactly. Some bad curriculum/instructional choices and, worst of all, lowering of expectations and standards in the name of equity. A better school system would raise the expectations and standards for the lowest performing, not lower them for the high achieving.

I will note regarding block scheduling - to get back to the original topic - that another advantage to block scheduling is that a student who is out sick one day does not miss every single class, just half. And when a student is out for a week (like mine is now due to a positive COVID test - ugh!), they only miss each class a few times rather 5 times.

There are other schedules where classes don't meet every day. Some schedules have classes meet four times a week, with off one day, with normal class length of 50 or so minutes.

Do you feel that your child misses less when they're out sick for a week under block? In theory, block and regular classes should cover the same content each week so you'd miss a comparable amount under either system. If they use part of blocks for independent work, however, then an absent student would miss less new content with blocks, but that may not be a good thing in the big picture since it means they get less new weekly content under blocks.

Exactly, if they are missing less content in a week when they are out on block, that means THERE IS LESS CONTENT IN A WEEK.

I actually think block can be worse when you're out sick. If you're out one day and it's the day you have math, you have missed double the math content than if you were just out for one day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google benefits of block scheduling. Teachers are NOT using it as a study hall.

Haha I can Google benefits of Lucy Caulkins too, look how that turned out.

You guys are idiots. Seriously. Block scheduling has been around since the 90s. We had it in my high school. Grow up.

Interesting, and yet people have been saying local school systems have been in decline since the 90s…

No. “They” haven’t been saying that.

Yeah, they've been saying it since the 2010's. Especially regarding APS.

APS isn’t in decline. You’re all so sheltered that you have no idea what a bad school system actually looks like. None of the ones in this entire metro area are bad. Not even close. The bulk of complaints about schools here, whether it’s APS, FCPS, MCPS, are just because too many people are overstretched on their house and angry they paid $900k for a shack inside the beltway and that pinch makes them feel like they’re entitled to something they were never going to get - a private school experience in a public school system.

The schools are good. You’re angry at what you spent on a house to get into those schools. But it doesn’t make them bad schools. Your issue isn’t block scheduling, it’s your mortgage

They didn't say they're "bad." They said they're "in decline." A good school system can be in decline and still be better relative to other school districts. It means they aren't as good as they used to be. And I don't care about ratings relative to NYC Public Schools or Chicago or even DC. I care about the school system my kids are in; and if it can be better, then people should push it to be better and call it out when they believe it is heading in the wrong direction. Why should we just accept whatever we have as long as it's still better than elsewhere?

Also, my buying a house has nothing to do with my dissatisfaction with certain things about APS. Not everyone "spent on a house to get into those schools." Maybe those who have more money and spent more money on their homes have a tendency to be more critical of APS; but don't you think it might be that they have higher expectations based on APS' reputation as well as their own personal experiences with APS, perhaps in comparison to their own educational experiences - as opposed to those of the poorer people in the community coming from far inferior education systems and therefore finding anything APS offers to be superior to where they came from? THOSE are the people who "spent on a house" to get their kids into a good school system.

There is nothing wrong with holding a school system to higher standards.

APS was definitely much better back in the 90s and early 2000s; we moved here in 2005 with a baby thinking it was for good schools.

However, back then APS was dealing with declining enrollment, meanwhile the county was getting wealthier with the housing boom and growth. They introduced IB into WL to attract students from Yorktown which at that time was comparable to Mclean in performance, and getting to HB was so much easier because there simply were fewer students interested in an alternative program.

Fast forward 15 years, and county student population exploded meanwhile the county coffers have declined; they blew a TON of money in the 2010s building SMALLER new high schools and the marque $$$$ Heights building. ATS & HB is overrun with applicants who are simply trying to escape the overcrowsed high schools rather than actually interested in the alternative program. The county was sued for equity, and so has invested a lot of effort on improving equity and their approach has to been to remove things like differentiation at younger grades and eliminate homework; bringing everyone down to same performance rather than improving from those who are behind.

Compounded with AHA lobbyists who are pushing more and more housing with more high need students, it is a different place.

Whether block scheduling which also started in the time was a factor is hard to know, since so much about the system has changed in last 20 years.

PP here. Yes, exactly. Some bad curriculum/instructional choices and, worst of all, lowering of expectations and standards in the name of equity. A better school system would raise the expectations and standards for the lowest performing, not lower them for the high achieving.

I will note regarding block scheduling - to get back to the original topic - that another advantage to block scheduling is that a student who is out sick one day does not miss every single class, just half. And when a student is out for a week (like mine is now due to a positive COVID test - ugh!), they only miss each class a few times rather 5 times.

There are other schedules where classes don't meet every day. Some schedules have classes meet four times a week, with off one day, with normal class length of 50 or so minutes.

Do you feel that your child misses less when they're out sick for a week under block? In theory, block and regular classes should cover the same content each week so you'd miss a comparable amount under either system. If they use part of blocks for independent work, however, then an absent student would miss less new content with blocks, but that may not be a good thing in the big picture since it means they get less new weekly content under blocks.

Exactly, if they are missing less content in a week when they are out on block, that means THERE IS LESS CONTENT IN A WEEK.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google benefits of block scheduling. Teachers are NOT using it as a study hall.

Haha I can Google benefits of Lucy Caulkins too, look how that turned out.

You guys are idiots. Seriously. Block scheduling has been around since the 90s. We had it in my high school. Grow up.

Interesting, and yet people have been saying local school systems have been in decline since the 90s…

No. “They” haven’t been saying that.

Yeah, they've been saying it since the 2010's. Especially regarding APS.

APS isn’t in decline. You’re all so sheltered that you have no idea what a bad school system actually looks like. None of the ones in this entire metro area are bad. Not even close. The bulk of complaints about schools here, whether it’s APS, FCPS, MCPS, are just because too many people are overstretched on their house and angry they paid $900k for a shack inside the beltway and that pinch makes them feel like they’re entitled to something they were never going to get - a private school experience in a public school system.

The schools are good. You’re angry at what you spent on a house to get into those schools. But it doesn’t make them bad schools. Your issue isn’t block scheduling, it’s your mortgage

They didn't say they're "bad." They said they're "in decline." A good school system can be in decline and still be better relative to other school districts. It means they aren't as good as they used to be. And I don't care about ratings relative to NYC Public Schools or Chicago or even DC. I care about the school system my kids are in; and if it can be better, then people should push it to be better and call it out when they believe it is heading in the wrong direction. Why should we just accept whatever we have as long as it's still better than elsewhere?

Also, my buying a house has nothing to do with my dissatisfaction with certain things about APS. Not everyone "spent on a house to get into those schools." Maybe those who have more money and spent more money on their homes have a tendency to be more critical of APS; but don't you think it might be that they have higher expectations based on APS' reputation as well as their own personal experiences with APS, perhaps in comparison to their own educational experiences - as opposed to those of the poorer people in the community coming from far inferior education systems and therefore finding anything APS offers to be superior to where they came from? THOSE are the people who "spent on a house" to get their kids into a good school system.

There is nothing wrong with holding a school system to higher standards.

APS was definitely much better back in the 90s and early 2000s; we moved here in 2005 with a baby thinking it was for good schools.

However, back then APS was dealing with declining enrollment, meanwhile the county was getting wealthier with the housing boom and growth. They introduced IB into WL to attract students from Yorktown which at that time was comparable to Mclean in performance, and getting to HB was so much easier because there simply were fewer students interested in an alternative program.

Fast forward 15 years, and county student population exploded meanwhile the county coffers have declined; they blew a TON of money in the 2010s building SMALLER new high schools and the marque $$$$ Heights building. ATS & HB is overrun with applicants who are simply trying to escape the overcrowsed high schools rather than actually interested in the alternative program. The county was sued for equity, and so has invested a lot of effort on improving equity and their approach has to been to remove things like differentiation at younger grades and eliminate homework; bringing everyone down to same performance rather than improving from those who are behind.

Compounded with AHA lobbyists who are pushing more and more housing with more high need students, it is a different place.

Whether block scheduling which also started in the time was a factor is hard to know, since so much about the system has changed in last 20 years.

PP here. Yes, exactly. Some bad curriculum/instructional choices and, worst of all, lowering of expectations and standards in the name of equity. A better school system would raise the expectations and standards for the lowest performing, not lower them for the high achieving.

I will note regarding block scheduling - to get back to the original topic - that another advantage to block scheduling is that a student who is out sick one day does not miss every single class, just half. And when a student is out for a week (like mine is now due to a positive COVID test - ugh!), they only miss each class a few times rather 5 times.

There are other schedules where classes don't meet every day. Some schedules have classes meet four times a week, with off one day, with normal class length of 50 or so minutes.

Do you feel that your child misses less when they're out sick for a week under block? In theory, block and regular classes should cover the same content each week so you'd miss a comparable amount under either system. If they use part of blocks for independent work, however, then an absent student would miss less new content with blocks, but that may not be a good thing in the big picture since it means they get less new weekly content under blocks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google benefits of block scheduling. Teachers are NOT using it as a study hall.

Haha I can Google benefits of Lucy Caulkins too, look how that turned out.

You guys are idiots. Seriously. Block scheduling has been around since the 90s. We had it in my high school. Grow up.

Interesting, and yet people have been saying local school systems have been in decline since the 90s…

No. “They” haven’t been saying that.

Yeah, they've been saying it since the 2010's. Especially regarding APS.

APS isn’t in decline. You’re all so sheltered that you have no idea what a bad school system actually looks like. None of the ones in this entire metro area are bad. Not even close. The bulk of complaints about schools here, whether it’s APS, FCPS, MCPS, are just because too many people are overstretched on their house and angry they paid $900k for a shack inside the beltway and that pinch makes them feel like they’re entitled to something they were never going to get - a private school experience in a public school system.

The schools are good. You’re angry at what you spent on a house to get into those schools. But it doesn’t make them bad schools. Your issue isn’t block scheduling, it’s your mortgage

They didn't say they're "bad." They said they're "in decline." A good school system can be in decline and still be better relative to other school districts. It means they aren't as good as they used to be. And I don't care about ratings relative to NYC Public Schools or Chicago or even DC. I care about the school system my kids are in; and if it can be better, then people should push it to be better and call it out when they believe it is heading in the wrong direction. Why should we just accept whatever we have as long as it's still better than elsewhere?

Also, my buying a house has nothing to do with my dissatisfaction with certain things about APS. Not everyone "spent on a house to get into those schools." Maybe those who have more money and spent more money on their homes have a tendency to be more critical of APS; but don't you think it might be that they have higher expectations based on APS' reputation as well as their own personal experiences with APS, perhaps in comparison to their own educational experiences - as opposed to those of the poorer people in the community coming from far inferior education systems and therefore finding anything APS offers to be superior to where they came from? THOSE are the people who "spent on a house" to get their kids into a good school system.

There is nothing wrong with holding a school system to higher standards.

APS was definitely much better back in the 90s and early 2000s; we moved here in 2005 with a baby thinking it was for good schools.

However, back then APS was dealing with declining enrollment, meanwhile the county was getting wealthier with the housing boom and growth. They introduced IB into WL to attract students from Yorktown which at that time was comparable to Mclean in performance, and getting to HB was so much easier because there simply were fewer students interested in an alternative program.

Fast forward 15 years, and county student population exploded meanwhile the county coffers have declined; they blew a TON of money in the 2010s building SMALLER new high schools and the marque $$$$ Heights building. ATS & HB is overrun with applicants who are simply trying to escape the overcrowsed high schools rather than actually interested in the alternative program. The county was sued for equity, and so has invested a lot of effort on improving equity and their approach has to been to remove things like differentiation at younger grades and eliminate homework; bringing everyone down to same performance rather than improving from those who are behind.

Compounded with AHA lobbyists who are pushing more and more housing with more high need students, it is a different place.

Whether block scheduling which also started in the time was a factor is hard to know, since so much about the system has changed in last 20 years.

PP here. Yes, exactly. Some bad curriculum/instructional choices and, worst of all, lowering of expectations and standards in the name of equity. A better school system would raise the expectations and standards for the lowest performing, not lower them for the high achieving.

I will note regarding block scheduling - to get back to the original topic - that another advantage to block scheduling is that a student who is out sick one day does not miss every single class, just half. And when a student is out for a week (like mine is now due to a positive COVID test - ugh!), they only miss each class a few times rather 5 times.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google benefits of block scheduling. Teachers are NOT using it as a study hall.

Haha I can Google benefits of Lucy Caulkins too, look how that turned out.

You guys are idiots. Seriously. Block scheduling has been around since the 90s. We had it in my high school. Grow up.

Interesting, and yet people have been saying local school systems have been in decline since the 90s…

No. “They” haven’t been saying that.

Yeah, they've been saying it since the 2010's. Especially regarding APS.

APS isn’t in decline. You’re all so sheltered that you have no idea what a bad school system actually looks like. None of the ones in this entire metro area are bad. Not even close. The bulk of complaints about schools here, whether it’s APS, FCPS, MCPS, are just because too many people are overstretched on their house and angry they paid $900k for a shack inside the beltway and that pinch makes them feel like they’re entitled to something they were never going to get - a private school experience in a public school system.

The schools are good. You’re angry at what you spent on a house to get into those schools. But it doesn’t make them bad schools. Your issue isn’t block scheduling, it’s your mortgage

They didn't say they're "bad." They said they're "in decline." A good school system can be in decline and still be better relative to other school districts. It means they aren't as good as they used to be. And I don't care about ratings relative to NYC Public Schools or Chicago or even DC. I care about the school system my kids are in; and if it can be better, then people should push it to be better and call it out when they believe it is heading in the wrong direction. Why should we just accept whatever we have as long as it's still better than elsewhere?

Also, my buying a house has nothing to do with my dissatisfaction with certain things about APS. Not everyone "spent on a house to get into those schools." Maybe those who have more money and spent more money on their homes have a tendency to be more critical of APS; but don't you think it might be that they have higher expectations based on APS' reputation as well as their own personal experiences with APS, perhaps in comparison to their own educational experiences - as opposed to those of the poorer people in the community coming from far inferior education systems and therefore finding anything APS offers to be superior to where they came from? THOSE are the people who "spent on a house" to get their kids into a good school system.

There is nothing wrong with holding a school system to higher standards.

APS was definitely much better back in the 90s and early 2000s; we moved here in 2005 with a baby thinking it was for good schools.

However, back then APS was dealing with declining enrollment, meanwhile the county was getting wealthier with the housing boom and growth. They introduced IB into WL to attract students from Yorktown which at that time was comparable to Mclean in performance, and getting to HB was so much easier because there simply were fewer students interested in an alternative program.

Fast forward 15 years, and county student population exploded meanwhile the county coffers have declined; they blew a TON of money in the 2010s building SMALLER new high schools and the marque $$$$ Heights building. ATS & HB is overrun with applicants who are simply trying to escape the overcrowsed high schools rather than actually interested in the alternative program. The county was sued for equity, and so has invested a lot of effort on improving equity and their approach has to been to remove things like differentiation at younger grades and eliminate homework; bringing everyone down to same performance rather than improving from those who are behind.

Compounded with AHA lobbyists who are pushing more and more housing with more high need students, it is a different place.

Whether block scheduling which also started in the time was a factor is hard to know, since so much about the system has changed in last 20 years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Google benefits of block scheduling. Teachers are NOT using it as a study hall.

Haha I can Google benefits of Lucy Caulkins too, look how that turned out.

You guys are idiots. Seriously. Block scheduling has been around since the 90s. We had it in my high school. Grow up.

Interesting, and yet people have been saying local school systems have been in decline since the 90s…

No. “They” haven’t been saying that.

Yeah, they've been saying it since the 2010's. Especially regarding APS.

APS isn’t in decline. You’re all so sheltered that you have no idea what a bad school system actually looks like. None of the ones in this entire metro area are bad. Not even close. The bulk of complaints about schools here, whether it’s APS, FCPS, MCPS, are just because too many people are overstretched on their house and angry they paid $900k for a shack inside the beltway and that pinch makes them feel like they’re entitled to something they were never going to get - a private school experience in a public school system.

The schools are good. You’re angry at what you spent on a house to get into those schools. But it doesn’t make them bad schools. Your issue isn’t block scheduling, it’s your mortgage

They didn't say they're "bad." They said they're "in decline." A good school system can be in decline and still be better relative to other school districts. It means they aren't as good as they used to be. And I don't care about ratings relative to NYC Public Schools or Chicago or even DC. I care about the school system my kids are in; and if it can be better, then people should push it to be better and call it out when they believe it is heading in the wrong direction. Why should we just accept whatever we have as long as it's still better than elsewhere?

Also, my buying a house has nothing to do with my dissatisfaction with certain things about APS. Not everyone "spent on a house to get into those schools." Maybe those who have more money and spent more money on their homes have a tendency to be more critical of APS; but don't you think it might be that they have higher expectations based on APS' reputation as well as their own personal experiences with APS, perhaps in comparison to their own educational experiences - as opposed to those of the poorer people in the community coming from far inferior education systems and therefore finding anything APS offers to be superior to where they came from? THOSE are the people who "spent on a house" to get their kids into a good school system.

There is nothing wrong with holding a school system to higher standards.