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:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.

Who assumes that? We're talking about probability. It's clear that there are much more behavioral issues ON AVERAGE in gen ed than AAP. Which is not surprising because smarter children come from better educated homes and also tend to be more self-regulated--tons and tons of research to support that.

Please post the toms and tons of research that support your assertion that well educated parents have better behaved children.

DP here. While I have no actual research, I have 3 kids who have gone through FCPS with one left at Churchill now. I can tell you from the 10+ years I have been at FCPS, the AAP classes have better behaved kids. Any person you speak to will confirm this. That isn’t to say a kid who didn’t get in AAP isn’t equally smart but the gened class just had more disruptive kids. A child who can test 99% on a test and have a high GBRS (gifted behavior rating) and shows good work is usually a more focused child. I have also seen super smart kids who test high not get in due to poor behavior in class. They likely got a low GBRS.

that is not the assertion. The assertion is that more educated parents means better behaved children not that AAP classes have fewer disruptions.

Not true. The assertion was that more educated parents (and more affluent) tend to have children who are better behaved. This was put forth as an account of why AAP classes tend to have fewer disruptive kids--because the kids who get into AAP *tend* to come from higher SES homes. Go back and reread. And it's bidirectional: higher SES parents want a less disruptive environment for their kids, so they pursue AAP more (and better neighborhoods).

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:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.

Who assumes that? We're talking about probability. It's clear that there are much more behavioral issues ON AVERAGE in gen ed than AAP. Which is not surprising because smarter children come from better educated homes and also tend to be more self-regulated--tons and tons of research to support that.

Please post the toms and tons of research that support your assertion that well educated parents have better behaved children.

DP here. While I have no actual research, I have 3 kids who have gone through FCPS with one left at Churchill now. I can tell you from the 10+ years I have been at FCPS, the AAP classes have better behaved kids. Any person you speak to will confirm this. That isn’t to say a kid who didn’t get in AAP isn’t equally smart but the gened class just had more disruptive kids. A child who can test 99% on a test and have a high GBRS (gifted behavior rating) and shows good work is usually a more focused child. I have also seen super smart kids who test high not get in due to poor behavior in class. They likely got a low GBRS.

that is not the assertion. The assertion is that more educated parents means better behaved children not that AAP classes have fewer disruptions.

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:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.

Who assumes that? We're talking about probability. It's clear that there are much more behavioral issues ON AVERAGE in gen ed than AAP. Which is not surprising because smarter children come from better educated homes and also tend to be more self-regulated--tons and tons of research to support that.

Please post the toms and tons of research that support your assertion that well educated parents have better behaved children.

Are you joking? Do you actually doubt that this is true? I am a researcher in this area and we regularly control for parent SES when looking at relations between behavioral regulation and other things because it's a known correlate.

Search Google Scholar yourself. Research exploring the connection between SES and behavioral regulation is a field unto itself.

You are the one pushing this assertion. Please provide the links.

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:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.

Who assumes that? We're talking about probability. It's clear that there are much more behavioral issues ON AVERAGE in gen ed than AAP. Which is not surprising because smarter children come from better educated homes and also tend to be more self-regulated--tons and tons of research to support that.

Please post the toms and tons of research that support your assertion that well educated parents have better behaved children.

DP here. While I have no actual research, I have 3 kids who have gone through FCPS with one left at Churchill now. I can tell you from the 10+ years I have been at FCPS, the AAP classes have better behaved kids. Any person you speak to will confirm this. That isn’t to say a kid who didn’t get in AAP isn’t equally smart but the gened class just had more disruptive kids. A child who can test 99% on a test and have a high GBRS (gifted behavior rating) and shows good work is usually a more focused child. I have also seen super smart kids who test high not get in due to poor behavior in class. They likely got a low GBRS.

Anonymous wrote:Is the front office still a three ring circus? Loud?

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:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.

Who assumes that? We're talking about probability. It's clear that there are much more behavioral issues ON AVERAGE in gen ed than AAP. Which is not surprising because smarter children come from better educated homes and also tend to be more self-regulated--tons and tons of research to support that.

Please post the toms and tons of research that support your assertion that well educated parents have better behaved children.

DP here. While I have no actual research, I have 3 kids who have gone through FCPS with one left at Churchill now. I can tell you from the 10+ years I have been at FCPS, the AAP classes have better behaved kids. Any person you speak to will confirm this. That isn’t to say a kid who didn’t get in AAP isn’t equally smart but the gened class just had more disruptive kids. A child who can test 99% on a test and have a high GBRS (gifted behavior rating) and shows good work is usually a more focused child. I have also seen super smart kids who test high not get in due to poor behavior in class. They likely got a low GBRS.

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:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

Gifted children and ADHD children share some traits. Maybe some of the disruptive kids are truly gifted. I am talking about both GE and AAP.

https://www.davidsongifted.org/gifted-blog/gifted-adhd-or-both/



At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.

Who assumes that? We're talking about probability. It's clear that there are much more behavioral issues ON AVERAGE in gen ed than AAP. Which is not surprising because smarter children come from better educated homes and also tend to be more self-regulated--tons and tons of research to support that.

Please post the toms and tons of research that support your assertion that well educated parents have better behaved children.

DP here. While I have no actual research, I have 3 kids who have gone through FCPS with one left at Churchill now. I can tell you from the 10+ years I have been at FCPS, the AAP classes have better behaved kids. Any person you speak to will confirm this. That isn’t to say a kid who didn’t get in AAP isn’t equally smart but the gened class just had more disruptive kids. A child who can test 99% on a test and have a high GBRS (gifted behavior rating) and shows good work is usually a more focused child. I have also seen super smart kids who test high not get in due to poor behavior in class. They likely got a low GBRS.

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:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

Gifted children and ADHD children share some traits. Maybe some of the disruptive kids are truly gifted. I am talking about both GE and AAP.

https://www.davidsongifted.org/gifted-blog/gifted-adhd-or-both/



At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.

Who assumes that? We're talking about probability. It's clear that there are much more behavioral issues ON AVERAGE in gen ed than AAP. Which is not surprising because smarter children come from better educated homes and also tend to be more self-regulated--tons and tons of research to support that.

Please post the toms and tons of research that support your assertion that well educated parents have better behaved children.

DP here. While I have no actual research, I have 3 kids who have gone through FCPS with one left at Churchill now. I can tell you from the 10+ years I have been at FCPS, the AAP classes have better behaved kids. Any person you speak to will confirm this. That isn’t to say a kid who didn’t get in AAP isn’t equally smart but the gened class just had more disruptive kids. A child who can test 99% on a test and have a high GBRS (gifted behavior rating) and shows good work is usually a more focused child. I have also seen super smart kids who test high not get in due to poor behavior in class. They likely got a low GBRS.

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:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.

Who assumes that? We're talking about probability. It's clear that there are much more behavioral issues ON AVERAGE in gen ed than AAP. Which is not surprising because smarter children come from better educated homes and also tend to be more self-regulated--tons and tons of research to support that.

Please post the toms and tons of research that support your assertion that well educated parents have better behaved children.

Are you joking? Do you actually doubt that this is true? I am a researcher in this area and we regularly control for parent SES when looking at relations between behavioral regulation and other things because it's a known correlate.

Search Google Scholar yourself. Research exploring the connection between SES and behavioral regulation is a field unto itself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.

Who assumes that? We're talking about probability. It's clear that there are much more behavioral issues ON AVERAGE in gen ed than AAP. Which is not surprising because smarter children come from better educated homes and also tend to be more self-regulated--tons and tons of research to support that.

Please post the toms and tons of research that support your assertion that well educated parents have better behaved children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.

Who assumes that? We're talking about probability. It's clear that there are much more behavioral issues ON AVERAGE in gen ed than AAP. Which is not surprising because smarter children come from better educated homes and also tend to be more self-regulated--tons and tons of research to support that.

Please post the toms and tons of research that support your assertion that well educated parents have better behaved children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.

Who assumes that? We're talking about probability. It's clear that there are much more behavioral issues ON AVERAGE in gen ed than AAP. Which is not surprising because smarter children come from better educated homes and also tend to be more self-regulated--tons and tons of research to support that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Churchill Road is the local Level IV center for the AAP program.

Definitely a reason to avoid. Center schools are the worst.

Why? Be honest.

They usually attract the families most motivated to get their kids into AAP, thus it’s more competitive. Then they tend to have at least half the classes from grade 3-6 as AAP, which creates a culture of AAP vs. non-AAP students, even though there is very little difference in the curriculum between them. (I’m a Churchill Road parent so I don’t dislike the school, but that’s the common belief about center schools). If your kid gets into AAP, it’s great. If they don’t, it’s still fine but they might feel bad about it.

+1
I would add, there is very little difference in both the curriculum, AND the abilities of the two groups of students. Separating the vast middle is just nonsense.

I have heard that the non AAP classes are full of disruptive kids. I have seen many families switch to private if kid does not get into AAP.

At a school like Churchill Road, there are not many disruptive kids and the disruptive kids who do go there are just as likely to be in AAP as not.

What you’ve “heard” just sounds like the typical bias that exists among some families hellbent to get their own kids into AAP.

+1
Plenty of troublemakers in AAP too. So bizarre that parents assume there won't be.

How is it bizarre? I assume people say this because it is true in their experience and the experience of others. Hence why so many clamor to get into AAP.

It's bizarre to assume that just because a 2nd grader scores well on a certain test, they are going to be perfectly behaved. There are lots of behavioral issues in AAP - kids who throw tantrums because they're perfectionists and things aren't going *just so* for them, kids who are know-it-alls and can't stand to be told they're wrong, etc. I had one child in GE and one in AAP and there were most definitely behavioral issues in both classes.