Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Should be like FSIQ over around 140.
exactly how do you propose the measure the FSIQ? This is the primary problem. At six or seven, the measurements are unstable: kids may not be able to sit still, they may have had a bad day, they may be sick, etc. When I was in grad school, I participated in an experiment that was designed to measure IQ variability. My baseline measurement was 147. When sleep deprived, the number dropped to 119. When distracted, the number was lower (distraction by placing me in a noisy environment).
A single measurement at a single point in time does not represent ability. Teacher observations are integrated over the year, and can realize if the scores are incosistant with the student. And some people prep to get a higher score.
Great explanation.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Should be like FSIQ over around 140.
exactly how do you propose the measure the FSIQ? This is the primary problem. At six or seven, the measurements are unstable: kids may not be able to sit still, they may have had a bad day, they may be sick, etc. When I was in grad school, I participated in an experiment that was designed to measure IQ variability. My baseline measurement was 147. When sleep deprived, the number dropped to 119. When distracted, the number was lower (distraction by placing me in a noisy environment).
A single measurement at a single point in time does not represent ability. Teacher observations are integrated over the year, and can realize if the scores are incosistant with the student. And some people prep to get a higher score.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Would love to hear from the teachers and administrators what their solutions are to providing a challenging environment for every child so they all can work at an accelerated pace for them. Wouldn't differentiation by subject alone make far better sense? I have yet to see a really gifted math student be awesome in English too, for example.
These are the kids that belong at, and succeed at AAP centers. There are plenty of them at our center.
Just what we need for our high tech future.Anonymous wrote:Should be like FSIQ over around 140.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am a product of the 70s, we never had special ed or ESOL in the main classroom. If you really want differentiated services, get rid of inclusion. In AAP and General Ed there are too many kids that are a distraction. I don't see us going back to the 70s school model, but the reality is that with kids on the spectrum, kids barely speaking English, kids with ADD or ADHD in a class with other, non-issue kids, there is no way a teacher can differentiate. In fact, the non-issue kids get very little in terms of actual time from the teacher. Differentiated services is a good idea in theory, though. Personally, in my years at FCPS, I have yet to see it in practice. Can you imagine working in an office cubicle with a coworker who acts out and grasps at the air, another one who doesn't understand what the others are saying, another who hits other kids, and another who acts out due to the inability to focus and then there is you, trying your best to get it done amid the confusion. I give my kids a high 5 every day, for dealing with this reality 6.5 hours a day. Where I work, the aforementioned behavior would not be tolerated by HR. I applaud FCPS teachers, there jobs seriously are hard! I applaud the kids that deal with this everyday, even more applause!
I too applaud FCPS teachers and agree their jobs are hard, but that seems to be the only area where you and I see eye to eye. I too am a child of the 70s. I tested out gifted. My high functioning autistic child is one of the better behaved kids in his mainstream classroom-better than I was and I wasn't a troublemaker. He is years ahead in reading and math. I can assure you his academic performance is years above what mine was at the same age and he doesn't test out as well as I did on IQ tests. His memory is amazing and far exceeds mine. As per his IEP je gets some support with motor skills and language-using appropriate tenses, etc. I wonder how you think my child could be holding yours back?
You do know there are kids in wheelchairs and/or kids with CP who have zero learning issues right?
What is a child has serious learning issues? Are you familiar with the research? Everyone benefits from inclusion if it is done right. I see no issue with a child with cognitive challenges learning in the same classroom as mine, in fact I applaud it, because at a good public school that child with have supports in place. Furthermore, I want my child to learn to appreciate and value all of his peers regardless of their challenges and strengths. Every child has something to offer to the classroom community.
Now if a kid with behavior issues is impacting the other children's ability to learn, ideally that child often ends up getting more self-contained classroom support and is gradually reintegrated. I know this is not always the case. I also know sometimes the kids with the worst behaviors are the kids without an IEP.
Anonymous wrote:I am a product of the 70s, we never had special ed or ESOL in the main classroom. If you really want differentiated services, get rid of inclusion. In AAP and General Ed there are too many kids that are a distraction. I don't see us going back to the 70s school model, but the reality is that with kids on the spectrum, kids barely speaking English, kids with ADD or ADHD in a class with other, non-issue kids, there is no way a teacher can differentiate. In fact, the non-issue kids get very little in terms of actual time from the teacher. Differentiated services is a good idea in theory, though. Personally, in my years at FCPS, I have yet to see it in practice. Can you imagine working in an office cubicle with a coworker who acts out and grasps at the air, another one who doesn't understand what the others are saying, another who hits other kids, and another who acts out due to the inability to focus and then there is you, trying your best to get it done amid the confusion. I give my kids a high 5 every day, for dealing with this reality 6.5 hours a day. Where I work, the aforementioned behavior would not be tolerated by HR. I applaud FCPS teachers, there jobs seriously are hard! I applaud the kids that deal with this everyday, even more applause!
Anonymous wrote:20% of all kids in grades 3-8 are in AAP.
They should go to a straight IQ test, and limit it to no more than the top 1%. Return the rest to gen ed. The teachers already provide differentiated services in the classroom, and will simply continue to do so.
Anonymous wrote:
Thank you for being honest!!! I think our principal has a PC agenda. I'm not unsympathetic that the kids in the lower groups feels stuck there (and one of my kids sometimes ends up in the lower groups) and I think the teachers need to be flexible about grouping, but to entirely eliminate ability grouping and then try to tell me that there will still be differentiation is insulting to my intelligence.
Anonymous wrote:Would love to hear from the teachers and administrators what their solutions are to providing a challenging environment for every child so they all can work at an accelerated pace for them. Wouldn't differentiation by subject alone make far better sense? I have yet to see a really gifted math student be awesome in English too, for example.