Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
We're again talking in circles. You clearly think that kids with 120s IQs "need" to be separated from the masses and placed in special classrooms. I don't. Could you please cite some sources showing that above average kids simply cannot function in a regular classroom, even with differentiation in core subjects?

They may function, but they are underserved, and end up wasting their time in class. Stays at school for 7hrs with kids that don't get it is mistreating the gift of time. That's cruel. Than they say that the kids are learning a lot, which they aren't. If they let them stay together and let them play outside in the sun a lot, is be ok with that, but I can afford (time wise) to enrich them when they come home so Larla doesn't get left behind. The kids need many more activities than school, and they need to maximize the benefit of the time spent, because they have very busy schedules. Its essentially like going to work full time. Would you like to get stuck in a job with low level workers if you're highly educated? Do you lack the skills to function around those people, or is it just not beneficial for you?

These same kids were served just fine in 2nd grade with switching classes and flexible grouping. Many of the kids didn't even qualify for the advanced math grouping or were middle-of-the pack within the advanced language arts or advanced math groupings. Meanwhile, kids who are actual outliers and poorly served in 2nd grade will continue to be poorly served in AAP, because the bar has been lowered so much. If 120s Larla simply can't be served in the same school as 110s Carla, then how on earth can 130s or 140s Darla be served in AAP with the 120s kids?

Let me guess... You have a 120s kid, and you're desperately clinging to the notion that your child is so special that (s)he "needs AAP".

"Really, kids who are 145+ in WISC FRI or cogat Quant need something much more than AAP math."

This is one of the crazy ideas out there. My mathy kids grew up with two neighbors who were 150+.

One of the neighbors was a published novelist in elementary school. The other was a violin prodigy.

Neither of them needed math really at all. They both finished Alg II in the 8th grade and then were dragged through enough math to be an engineer in HS.

It was almost cruel.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wrong!

Just because some kids need an additional level of differentiation, does not mean that the ones already getting it don't need it! Instead of hating AAP we can work to improve it. I'm all for an additional layer of differentiation, where the highly gifted kids can benefit fully, or at least a lot more. But, to take differentiation away from kids that need it is not right. You have to draw the line at some point, and if the process is holistic then why are we relying so much on these test scores and ignoring the rest of the process? The system is not full proof, and can be improved, but there is no magic biller when it comes to this.

You really like creating straw men. NO ONE HAS BEEN ARGUING FOR TAKING DIFFERENTIATION AWAY FROM KIDS. 120s Larla should still be receiving advanced math and advanced language arts instruction. Many of us are arguing that she doesn't need to be labeled as different and then guaranteed self-contained separate classrooms for 6 years.

Well, excuse me!

I should have said AAP Level IV services, in a separate classroom. I apologize for puzzling you.

We're again talking in circles. You clearly think that kids with 120s IQs "need" to be separated from the masses and placed in special classrooms. I don't. Could you please cite some sources showing that above average kids simply cannot function in a regular classroom, even with differentiation in core subjects?

They may function, but they are underserved, and end up wasting their time in class. Stays at school for 7hrs with kids that don't get it is mistreating the gift of time. That's cruel. Than they say that the kids are learning a lot, which they aren't. If they let them stay together and let them play outside in the sun a lot, is be ok with that, but I can afford (time wise) to enrich them when they come home so Larla doesn't get left behind. The kids need many more activities than school, and they need to maximize the benefit of the time spent, because they have very busy schedules. Its essentially like going to work full time. Would you like to get stuck in a job with low level workers if you're highly educated? Do you lack the skills to function around those people, or is it just not beneficial for you?

Anonymous wrote:
The biggest problem is that most parents whose kids aren't advanced can't admit that that is the case, but want every one else to lower their standards. Then they start calling other parents elitist.

Nope. The biggest problem is that parents with kids who are above average but not gifted can't admit that is the case, and instead have forced AAP to lower its standards to include their children. This is why about 20% of children are identified as Level IV. In the meantime, kids who are actually gifted suffer from a watered down AAP curriculum and learn next to nothing.

We can keep going at this all day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ what's the point?

I am the pp. Frankly, I used to think that just raising the bar for everyone was the answer. But I realize now that I have had kids, Thai it is not the answer. FWIW, the Eastern European curriculum was based on the assumption that only 30% or so of the top students would go to college and everyone else would be shunted to the vocational track in/after high school. Different kids have different abilities. Some need a more advanced curriculum. Others need the extra help in one subject or another. Unfortunately, differentiation has very negative connotations in this country - people claim that it's racist, classist and what not. Whereas in reality, everyone has different strengths and they should be accommodated as much as possible.

You made the point very clearly. Thanks. The reason I brought it up was to illustrate that no matter the model, it won't work for everyone. The point is, what do you do with the kids that are clueless, do you put them in an advanced curriculum and let them be lost, or do you differentiate their learning, so the can comfortably learn something. The biggest problem is that most parents whose kids aren't advanced can't admit that that is the case, but want every one else to lower their standards. Then they start calling other parents elitist. Also, smart parents will have smart kids, so given the high number of high achiever/smart/well educated parents in parts of the county, you'll have more smarter kids in those areas. Intelligence like every other human attribute is mostly genetic. The same as we inherent physical traits, we also inherent personality and intellectual traits. The problem is that it's a big 'no no' to say that.

If those more affluent areas with a higher number of advanced kids had a different curriculum from the rest of the county, that'd be a big 'no no' too, because it would create disparity in opportunities. Hence we are left with a separate Level of differentiation.

This debate will never end, because there is not a one solution fits all to this problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wrong!

Just because some kids need an additional level of differentiation, does not mean that the ones already getting it don't need it! Instead of hating AAP we can work to improve it. I'm all for an additional layer of differentiation, where the highly gifted kids can benefit fully, or at least a lot more. But, to take differentiation away from kids that need it is not right. You have to draw the line at some point, and if the process is holistic then why are we relying so much on these test scores and ignoring the rest of the process? The system is not full proof, and can be improved, but there is no magic biller when it comes to this.

You really like creating straw men. NO ONE HAS BEEN ARGUING FOR TAKING DIFFERENTIATION AWAY FROM KIDS. 120s Larla should still be receiving advanced math and advanced language arts instruction. Many of us are arguing that she doesn't need to be labeled as different and then guaranteed self-contained separate classrooms for 6 years.

Well, excuse me!

I should have said AAP Level IV services, in a separate classroom. I apologize for puzzling you.

We're again talking in circles. You clearly think that kids with 120s IQs "need" to be separated from the masses and placed in special classrooms. I don't. Could you please cite some sources showing that above average kids simply cannot function in a regular classroom, even with differentiation in core subjects?

*parents of academically advanced kids...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DP. Other posters have said that "differentiation" doesn't work, that advanced math and advanced language arts aren't.

Grouping the top 20 math kids together for math, and the top 20 language arts kids for language arts doesn't work, but shipping those same 20 kids to a center for self-contained classrooms does? Ridiculous.

Did you read this thread from the beginning? Or do you just disbelieve other posters?

A couple posters saying that it doesn't work doesn't hold much water, especially since they haven't managed to back their viewpoints with anything other than conjecture and anecdata. It sounds more like a bunch of people with bright average, non-gifted kids are desperate to retain their special status and are using any excuse as to why their kids needs simply can't be met without being completely separated from the masses.

The vast majority of AAP kids return to their base schools for high school and are mixed with the formerly gen ed kids. Amazingly, it all works fine there.

In high school there is still segregation. The same group of kids tend to take IB or AP classes together. Some previously gen ed kids join the group and now are a part of the group. I think the real reason we are where we are today with the AAP divide is that some SJWs decided that tracking in lower grades is bad, so there is no open enrollment honors classes before middle school. Parents of kids with academically advance kids then see AAP as a way to get their kids the differentiation they want (instead of once a week pull out) and do whatever it takes to get that. Because of the way AAP is structured, it's all or nothing, and you can't place based on achievement (like you can in MS and HS). Starting open enrollment honors in 3rd grade would avoid a lot of the issues, but alas, you'd have people steaming about that, ignoring the fact that AAP no longer serves only gifted kids and is way worse in its effect on segregating kids.

Anonymous wrote:My daughter got into the pool. We aren’t going to put her in aap and we didn’t tell her. We will probably move from ffx after this last year and how parents have acted telling their kids who is going to aap and who is “gen ed”.

This is not a good reason to move, IMO. You might move into an area that has more economic snobbery, more ethnic divide...there will always be something. Just teach your kids to be good people and hope for the best. Also, are you sure parents are telling the kids? I remember DC coming home from school and saying kids were discussing it at lunch. Each parent tells their child when they get in because many times it involves a school change. Also, when kids go to the orientation they see kids from their base school. Those kids talk about it at lunch....I told my DC not to discuss it because I know it can create a divide, but as second graders if someone brings it up, I'm not sure how much self restraint they had. I get how you feel, but I have friends in other school districts and they have issue too.

Anonymous wrote:^ what's the point?

I am the pp. Frankly, I used to think that just raising the bar for everyone was the answer. But I realize now that I have had kids, Thai it is not the answer. FWIW, the Eastern European curriculum was based on the assumption that only 30% or so of the top students would go to college and everyone else would be shunted to the vocational track in/after high school. Different kids have different abilities. Some need a more advanced curriculum. Others need the extra help in one subject or another. Unfortunately, differentiation has very negative connotations in this country - people claim that it's racist, classist and what not. Whereas in reality, everyone has different strengths and they should be accommodated as much as possible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DP. Other posters have said that "differentiation" doesn't work, that advanced math and advanced language arts aren't.

Grouping the top 20 math kids together for math, and the top 20 language arts kids for language arts doesn't work, but shipping those same 20 kids to a center for self-contained classrooms does? Ridiculous.

Did you read this thread from the beginning? Or do you just disbelieve other posters?

A couple posters saying that it doesn't work doesn't hold much water, especially since they haven't managed to back their viewpoints with anything other than conjecture and anecdata. It sounds more like a bunch of people with bright average, non-gifted kids are desperate to retain their special status and are using any excuse as to why their kids needs simply can't be met without being completely separated from the masses.

The vast majority of AAP kids return to their base schools for high school and are mixed with the formerly gen ed kids. Amazingly, it all works fine there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
AAP and GT centers are disproportionately filled with kids who come from higher ranked schools in rich neighborhoods. Until each neighborhood school sends the same number of kids to the center instead of 40 kids from each great falls school per grade and one kid from herndon per grade, these centers will stay elitist and not full of the kids who could actually benefit from gifted education.

That ^. My kids' base school is very diverse, both racially and by SES. About 20% qualify for AAP, and they're almost entirely white or Asian high SES kids. In many cases, they're kids from incredibly enriched households with parents who decided that they belonged in AAP from the time they were born. They are then are prepped into getting a 120s cogat, and somehow get in. How is this not elitist and an example of "white flight"?

This is why the program expands each year. Fairfax is trying to capture more disadvantaged gifted kids. They haven't been noticeably successful. Do you have recommendations for Fairfax?

They could tell everyone about the availability of prep materials instead of saying all you need is a good night's sleep. This way everyone will be in the know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wrong!

Just because some kids need an additional level of differentiation, does not mean that the ones already getting it don't need it! Instead of hating AAP we can work to improve it. I'm all for an additional layer of differentiation, where the highly gifted kids can benefit fully, or at least a lot more. But, to take differentiation away from kids that need it is not right. You have to draw the line at some point, and if the process is holistic then why are we relying so much on these test scores and ignoring the rest of the process? The system is not full proof, and can be improved, but there is no magic biller when it comes to this.

You really like creating straw men. NO ONE HAS BEEN ARGUING FOR TAKING DIFFERENTIATION AWAY FROM KIDS. 120s Larla should still be receiving advanced math and advanced language arts instruction. Many of us are arguing that she doesn't need to be labeled as different and then guaranteed self-contained separate classrooms for 6 years.

Well, excuse me!

I should have said AAP Level IV services, in a separate classroom. I apologize for puzzling you.

Anonymous wrote:Did I speak slow enough for you monolinguals?

Who you're talking to? You were actually not clear in your statement! The only obvious thing was rage.

So arrogant to think that you are above others because of your beliefs about them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DP. Other posters have said that "differentiation" doesn't work, that advanced math and advanced language arts aren't.

Grouping the top 20 math kids together for math, and the top 20 language arts kids for language arts doesn't work, but shipping those same 20 kids to a center for self-contained classrooms does? Ridiculous.

Did you read this thread from the beginning? Or do you just disbelieve other posters?