Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The problem is this: the College Board has massively increased its AP enrollment over the last four to five years. This means that there are, obviously, more people in AP.
The reason that most or many secondary schools don't have GATE is because they have AP, which is supposed to be the equivalent of accelerated or intensive instruction for high-ability learners.
Again, with the increase in numbers, what's happening is that many students are in AP who aren't necessarily prepared for it. This tends to slow down (or, at least in some cases, dumb down) the instruction -- or at least it has done where I work.
To be perfectly clear, I am not saying, "Only gifted students should be in AP." I am, however, saying that AP classes used to be basically a gifted kid's refuge because they were largely populated by a) other gifted kids, or b) hardworking, industrious kids.
Now the population has changed somewhat, particularly since many of the folks who are in AP aren't prepared and are in the class because of what I believe to be less-than-appropriate reasons, e.g., "My friends are taking it."
And why do colleges want to see higher AP enrollment? Because a standard education is now so watered down it doesn't prepare kids for college. The only thing you can do is push the kids who can handle more up when you're busy teaching to the test in the other courses.
I think there are more AP's because that's what the parents want. The pre-req's to take AP's at our school are pretty rigorous and the classes themselves are difficult. They are also a great way to save money by being able skip intro courses at college. I'm glad the AP's aren't available to every child at our school.
And why do colleges want to see higher AP enrollment? Because a standard education is now so watered down it doesn't prepare kids for college. The only thing you can do is push the kids who can handle more up when you're busy teaching to the test in the other courses.
The colleges don't care about AP enrollment at this point.
They care about AP Test scores.
An AP course with no test taken is now a red flag to most admissions offices, and provides no boost.
I think there are more AP's because that's what the parents want. The pre-req's to take AP's at our school are pretty rigorous and the classes themselves are difficult. They are also a great way to save money by being able skip intro courses at college. I'm glad the AP's aren't available to every child at our school.
If you really make the pre-req's rigorous, this can work. You'll weed out the ones that don't belong before they get there.
I presume that we will see the fruits of your number-crunching - if not, if you are so inclined, PM me and I will provide contact info.
Have fun!
As it turns out, my hypothesis was wrong, whether I looked at the figures for my state or specifically for the subject I teach. The percentage of students earning 4s and 5s has stayed fairly constant, actually.
Though it's somewhat vexing to be wrong, it's actually far better that I am!!
No it doesn't. It means exactly what I said. That if you stagnate, you're done moving up. Hopefully, you don't change your mind later (people do grow bored of the same old thing over time so they just might) because it's unlikely you can then.
However, to some extent moving up is desirable. I know few people who desires to earn exactly what they do today 20 years from now. Most want to see improvement over time.
It will increase whether we want it to or not. Everything goes up, wages, costs, everything...and where does it get us if everything is relatively the same?
It will increase whether we want it to or not. Everything goes up, wages, costs, everything...and where does it get us if everything is relatively the same?
Which is why moving up is disirable. Few of us don't want better than we have.
Which is why moving up is disirable. Few of us don't want better than we have.
I'm satisfied with very little...and I know I'm not the only person like that.
It's not a matter of having the latest and best "toys" for me, or much of anything else. As long as I have a roof over my head, and food in my stomach, I'm pretty content.
There's nothing wrong with being able to be content, and not HAVE to feel like you're always striving for "something more". I'm good.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The only thing you can do is push the kids who can handle more up when you're busy teaching to the test in the other courses.
