Anonymous wrote:At our school they are not implementing their advanced math program anywhere near like it was advertised. Once a week is not the same as every day advanced instruction. The reading program is less than stellar as well. The whole idea of differentiated learning within one classroom is a joke especially with FCPS's ultra large class sizes. I've never seen it work well this way. Children need to switch classrooms for this to happen at the very least and have an advanced curriculum to go with it.
Anonymous wrote:Here's what I think is also behind more and more kids getting designated as AAP. Please don't think I'm being insensitive or racist. One of the reasons we chose our neighborhood is the diversity in our school. More kids seem to stand out as advanced now, when they wouldn't have before, because they are being compared to the large number of kids in their class who are still learning English. I know many parents in my neighborhood who brag about how far ahead their children are based solely on the fact that their child seems bored. The reason the child seems bored is because teachers are teaching to the SOL tests and must go slowly and repeat themselves to help the English learners.
Moms tell me their child is in the top of the class and think that means their kid should go to a center but really that child seems like the top of the class because at our school 70% of kids are ESL students. (Obviously this isn't the case at every school but more and more schools have this profile.) I'm NOT saying the English learners aren't smart and talented too, of course they are, they just aren't comfortable with English yet. Two of my friends have rising 2nd graders and are already super intense kabout getting their kids into the center. Neither of these kids is above grade level in any area and they would NEVER stand out at a school like Mantua or at a school in McLean.
Anonymous wrote:I am always so surprised by posters who seem to know so much about how smart, how above (or not) grade level, how naturally gifted or obviously prepped other people's kids are. I mean, I know what reading/math groups my DC is in and I know the kids that sit at her table- otherwise, I have NO clue where all or any of her friends fall on the spectrum.
PP above for example, assumes she understands what her neighbor's kid needs more than her neighbor. Just so bizarre to me.
Do you quiz your kids' friends when they come over for playdates? Just how do you evaluate? Do you tell jokes to see if they get them?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Really? I have a rising 2nd grader and have been somewhat frustrated with the lack of differentiation/progress made during the year. Her 1st grade teacher was wonderful, but I would get reports like "DC scored at this DRA, it is very likely higher, but I am only allowed to test up to that level at this point in the year." That kind of thing bothered me - why the ceiling? To the school's credit, DC was pulled out weekly for math and reading, but I felt like it was very little advanced exposure/instruction. It took a couple of months from the start of school for the pull outs to begin and then they ended at 6 weeks or so before the year ended - so it was a hour or two a week and not the whole school year. The math curriculum seemed not much more than what they did in K.
Maybe see how second grade goes. When my child was in second grade, they pre-tested before each new chapter and then divided the kids up into eight different math groupings. They also differentiated within the classroom for reading, spelling and writing. There was a wiiide range of abilities in that classroom and that teacher had to work really hard to provide appropriate instruction for each child. She did do it, God bless her, but it really is easier to provide suitable instruction when children are divided up into different ability groupings.
Anonymous wrote:
Really? I have a rising 2nd grader and have been somewhat frustrated with the lack of differentiation/progress made during the year. Her 1st grade teacher was wonderful, but I would get reports like "DC scored at this DRA, it is very likely higher, but I am only allowed to test up to that level at this point in the year." That kind of thing bothered me - why the ceiling? To the school's credit, DC was pulled out weekly for math and reading, but I felt like it was very little advanced exposure/instruction. It took a couple of months from the start of school for the pull outs to begin and then they ended at 6 weeks or so before the year ended - so it was a hour or two a week and not the whole school year. The math curriculum seemed not much more than what they did in K.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If there is such little difference in the curriculum, what would the problem be with offering to everyone?
AAP is not that difficult or challenging compared to the baseline progam but being in a peer group of eclectic, bright, accademically motivated kids makes a huge difference.
ES teacher here. My experience has been that we over identify students for AAP. Last year, 1/3 of my third graders were pulled weekly for school based AAP. That's not counting those who left for the center. It doesn't seem to be very difficult to qualify for AAP. For example, I had a student new to FCPS last year. A week after AAP students started to be pulled from my classroom, I received an email saying that X Student would begin AAP the next week. When I asked how he qualified (no screening, teacher input, etc.), the answer was, "His ____ score was high enough". That was it.
The County has a BIG push for all students to be remediated and enriched within their own classroom. The new teacher evaluation process requires us to show how each and every child is improving. We should not be teaching to the middle of the class. If every child's education can be enriched within their base classroom, I see no need to continue with AAP centers.
The first I heard of this FAT placement test was in this thread. Perhaps I'll hear more about it once we return to work next week.
Personalized education? Sounds great. But, with so many kids in each class, how to do you get it done?
PP here. That's a good question. It has become tougher that past few years, and will continue to get tougher with the new progress reports, but this is what FCPS is pushing. Standards will continually be retaught to those who are not demonstrating mastery, while we continue with the curriculum according to the Pacing Guide. Those who already "get it" will have their instruction enriched. Actually, by FCPS's expectations, all students are receiving enrichment. Starting this year, 40% of a teacher's evaluation will be based on student progress, not on the SOLs, but on the students' SMARTR goals. Maybe another teacher can weigh in, but last year I became overwhelmed with the prepping, assessing, and record keeping required for each student.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If there is such little difference in the curriculum, what would the problem be with offering to everyone?
AAP is not that difficult or challenging compared to the baseline progam but being in a peer group of eclectic, bright, accademically motivated kids makes a huge difference.
ES teacher here. My experience has been that we over identify students for AAP. Last year, 1/3 of my third graders were pulled weekly for school based AAP. That's not counting those who left for the center. It doesn't seem to be very difficult to qualify for AAP. For example, I had a student new to FCPS last year. A week after AAP students started to be pulled from my classroom, I received an email saying that X Student would begin AAP the next week. When I asked how he qualified (no screening, teacher input, etc.), the answer was, "His ____ score was high enough". That was it.
The County has a BIG push for all students to be remediated and enriched within their own classroom. The new teacher evaluation process requires us to show how each and every child is improving. We should not be teaching to the middle of the class. If every child's education can be enriched within their base classroom, I see no need to continue with AAP centers.
The first I heard of this FAT placement test was in this thread. Perhaps I'll hear more about it once we return to work next week.
Personalized education? Sounds great. But, with so many kids in each class, how to do you get it done?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If there is such little difference in the curriculum, what would the problem be with offering to everyone?
AAP is not that difficult or challenging compared to the baseline progam but being in a peer group of eclectic, bright, accademically motivated kids makes a huge difference.
ES teacher here. My experience has been that we over identify students for AAP. Last year, 1/3 of my third graders were pulled weekly for school based AAP. That's not counting those who left for the center. It doesn't seem to be very difficult to qualify for AAP. For example, I had a student new to FCPS last year. A week after AAP students started to be pulled from my classroom, I received an email saying that X Student would begin AAP the next week. When I asked how he qualified (no screening, teacher input, etc.), the answer was, "His ____ score was high enough". That was it.
The County has a BIG push for all students to be remediated and enriched within their own classroom. The new teacher evaluation process requires us to show how each and every child is improving. We should not be teaching to the middle of the class. If every child's education can be enriched within their base classroom, I see no need to continue with AAP centers.
The first I heard of this FAT placement test was in this thread. Perhaps I'll hear more about it once we return to work next week.
Anonymous wrote:If there is such little difference in the curriculum, what would the problem be with offering to everyone?
AAP is not that difficult or challenging compared to the baseline progam but being in a peer group of eclectic, bright, accademically motivated kids makes a huge difference.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Most kids have the necessary cognitive ability to handle the AAP curriculum, if they and/or their parents get their priorities straight. I say raise the bar and make AAP the standard. Kids who really are not able to make it in such a program can be placed in a less rigorous one.
I have two kids who went through the so called "gifted" program and ended up at TJ. Frankly, I don't see much difference, in terms of mental abilities, between my kids and their "gifted" peers and most of the so called "general ed" kids.
Can we get an FB-like, "Like" button on DCUM. Raise the bar!
100% agree, raise the bar!!!