Anonymous wrote:Most of the people who are most adamantly against aap or TJ or the like have traditionally average kids.
What do you think qualifies you to have a valid opinion or a meaningful input if you don’t have a real understanding of gifted individuals?
Anonymous wrote:Because I pay taxes and I think you should pay for private/private supplementation instead. I send my kids to private starting preK, never did any testing, but DH went to TJ.
Anonymous wrote:Draw the line on prep
1. Reading to a child everyday since they are very young
2. Taking them to various parks, museums, etc.
3. Giving them puzzles, legos, and other building toys.
4. Teaching them language, math, science at home at their level.
5. Enrolling them in an educational academy that teaches them language, math, science.
6. Buying a NNAT/COGAT book to practice at home.
I assume #1-5 are absolutely fine and the argument is only with #6?
People who do 1-5 are the ones whose children would likely end up in AAP, regardless of #6.
People who are going to care a lot about academics are always going to give their children a leg up.
FYI - I strongly dislike the tone of OP. Please no need to insult children.
Anonymous wrote:Draw the line on prep
1. Reading to a child everyday since they are very young
2. Taking them to various parks, museums, etc.
3. Giving them puzzles, legos, and other building toys.
4. Teaching them language, math, science at home at their level.
5. Enrolling them in an educational academy that teaches them language, math, science.
6. Buying a NNAT/COGAT book to practice at home.
I assume #1-5 are absolutely fine and the argument is only with #6?
People who do 1-5 are the ones whose children would likely end up in AAP, regardless of #6.
People who are going to care a lot about academics are always going to give their children a leg up.
FYI - I strongly dislike the tone of OP. Please no need to insult children.
Anonymous wrote:Draw the line on prep
1. Reading to a child everyday since they are very young
2. Taking them to various parks, museums, etc.
3. Giving them puzzles, legos, and other building toys.
4. Teaching them language, math, science at home at their level.
5. Enrolling them in an educational academy that teaches them language, math, science.
6. Buying a NNAT/COGAT book to practice at home.
I assume #1-5 are absolutely fine and the argument is only with #6?
People who do 1-5 are the ones whose children would likely end up in AAP, regardless of #6.
People who are going to care a lot about academics are always going to give their children a leg up.
FYI - I strongly dislike the tone of OP. Please no need to insult children.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Most of the people who are most adamantly against aap or TJ or the like have traditionally average kids.
What do you think qualifies you to have a valid opinion or a meaningful input if you don’t have a real understanding of gifted individuals?
Ask all of the people who have been using exam prep to pass their kids off as brighter than they are.
This happens ALL the time with ALL kinds of tests. Med school grads have to take the board test and law school grads have to pass the bar exam to become licensed. Are you saying these people cheated because they used prep materials including previously used exam questions when preparing to take these tests?
The problem isn't prep per se but that it's only available to those who are willing to invest in it. The problem is public school programs should be open to everyone not just those who can afford to invest in prep.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Because I have taught in gifted programs. The AAP craziness is just that. The highest level services were designed for true outlier kids - kids that nowadays would likely be classed as 2E or scary prodigies. It was not meant for simply really bright kids. The more you push bright or barely bright kids into the program, the more worthless it becomes. Track kids in their home schools, add supplemental work. The kids that it is meant for are the kids that took up 75% of my time and most of the oxygen in the classroom. I still remember many of their names many years later and I think of them with fondness, but the rest should have just been in a more traditionally structured classroom.
You’re lying. If you think the highest AaP services is designed for the prodigies then you have clearly never taught aap.
Anonymous wrote:Most of the people who are most adamantly against aap or TJ or the like have traditionally average kids.
What do you think qualifies you to have a valid opinion or a meaningful input if you don’t have a real understanding of gifted individuals?
Anonymous wrote:Op, your open question speaks volumes about you. Please re-read what you wrote. This isn’t about ‘smart’ enough. Check yourself.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Most of the people who are most adamantly against aap or TJ or the like have traditionally average kids.
What do you think qualifies you to have a valid opinion or a meaningful input if you don’t have a real understanding of gifted individuals?
Ask all of the people who have been using exam prep to pass their kids off as brighter than they are.
This happens ALL the time with ALL kinds of tests. Med school grads have to take the board test and law school grads have to pass the bar exam to become licensed. Are you saying these people cheated because they used prep materials including previously used exam questions when preparing to take these tests?
Anonymous wrote:Because I have taught in gifted programs. The AAP craziness is just that. The highest level services were designed for true outlier kids - kids that nowadays would likely be classed as 2E or scary prodigies. It was not meant for simply really bright kids. The more you push bright or barely bright kids into the program, the more worthless it becomes. Track kids in their home schools, add supplemental work. The kids that it is meant for are the kids that took up 75% of my time and most of the oxygen in the classroom. I still remember many of their names many years later and I think of them with fondness, but the rest should have just been in a more traditionally structured classroom.