<p>The CB dropped the CS AB test (which covered more material than CS A) because of lack of student interest. Now, it seems that they are making a CS Principles test which approximates an overview-for-non-majors course in college, but which could really also be a good high school level introduction to CS (which may help draw more in more students genuinely interested in the field, while perhaps also showing the “in it just for the money” types that it is harder than it may look for those without a genuine interest in it).</p>
<p>That pretty much shows that AP is moving away from providing advanced high school students with a way to place ahead of introductory courses in college, to a way of giving incentive to high schools to offer useful high school level courses.</p>
<p>UCB…from what I understand, the new AP CS course may earn credit at some schools for the “token” technology or computer course that is often built into non-cs majors degree requirement. So CB is basically providing another gen ed course with the new CS program. I think it is still about 3 years out from implementation though.</p>
<p>I saw *Race to Nowhere *last year around this time. If there are no screenings scheduled in your area, you can apply to host a screening at your school. The one I attended was hosted by a local STEM school at our science museum. They did not charge admission.</p>
<p>Don’t waste your time on “Race to Nowhere.” “Waiting for Superman,” while still having gaping holes, is much better if you’re looking for an education-related documentary.</p>
<p>I saw Superman, and it does not really address the whole AP issue, it is more about access issues/ charter schools/ discrepencies between schools. Does Race to Nowhere address AP classes more, or the overall issue with low expectations in the school?</p>
<p>I thought both movies were very one-sided. Interesting, but neither shows the whole picture. We have “Waiting for Superman” at my library but according to this site [Race</a> to Nowhere |](<a href=“http://www.racetonowhere.com/screenings]Race”>http://www.racetonowhere.com/screenings) Race to nowhere is still being shown privately.</p>
<p>I haven’t seen Race to Nowhere. I have seen Waiting For Superman, and I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone. I am generally very sympathetic to the need for massive reform in primary and secondary education, and I tend to like charter school. But that film is like a paid commercial for one (of many) proposed solutions to those issues, and it does not come anywhere close to giving a balanced, accurate account of the problems, the potential solutions, or any of the shortcomings of charter schools. I watched it on cable, and I was yelling back at the screen half the time. (My wife and children, all of whom are closer to, more knowledgeable about, and more engaged with the issues than I, watched it with me, and agreed with me on substance, but thought it was stupid that I was yelling at the TV.)</p>
<p>I have seen Race to Nowhere but not Waiting for Superman. I was not a fan of Race to Nowhere. The families in the movie seemed to be super stressed out and blamed school (and only school) for their stress, but not their other life choices such as extracurriculars, Facebook, etc. A lot of the kids featured were not top students and I felt that they contributed to their own stress by having unrealistic goals.</p>
<p>One group advocated for a no homework policy – all the time. As an earlier poster referenced, it was too “Kumbaya-ish” for me.</p>
<p>What was most interesting for me was the discussion that followed the film.</p>
<p>I’m skeptical about the need for proliferation of AP classes. I agree with most of what’s covered, but want to add that another impetus is the “most rigorous curriculum” box that guidance counselors have to check off for elite schools. Students feel pressure to take more and more APs to ensure that the GC checks off that box. </p>
<p>Another issue is that as more and more kids take more and more APs, it becomes norm for students to take APs in everything. A kid who isn’t great at math is put under considerable stress to take calculus, because if they don’t, that box isn’t checked. Back when I went to high school, you took APs in the classes you were good at, not in everything. At my daughter’s high school, the AP math teacher made it crystal clear that she was teaching AP calculus assuming that everyone of her students was going to major in engineering, physics or computer science. She advised my humanities kid to not take her class. </p>
<p>My public high school in the 1970s had very few APs but many honors classes. These were true honors classes. My European history class in 10th grade was probably the hardest class I ever took, and it was not AP. Schools where it’s either AP or easy are lazy and unimaginative.</p>
<p>I would support a blanket policy by a school of NOT checking most rigorous curriculum for anyone. My D1 took 10 AP exams and it still was not the MOST rigorous curriculum. That’s absurd. I have no idea if the box was checked, but we didn’t care. They can tell colleges that in the school profile. They can tell the colleges that they don’t recommend the MOST rigorous curriculum for anyone, and that they have found too many students care more about getting that box checked than their own health. Therefore they won’t check the box for anyone. </p>
<p>Let the colleges figure out how rigorous a student’s curriculum is. I don’t care about college admissions, I care about education. </p>
<p>I don’t think kids should take APs for the purpose of getting that box checked. I think it’s better to take fewer APs in subjects they are interested in. But I also don’t think it’s up to me to tell students that they can’t study as hard as they want to. Some can and do just find. I don’t think the school should limit their education. </p>
<p>I’d like to eliminate the competition, not the education.</p>
<p>I didn’t love Waiting for Superman either, but I thought it was much better if you want a documentary about education. JHS, I didn’t yell at the screen as I was at a public viewing; instead I made snarky comments to the friend sitting next to me. It had facts and charts and narration and framing instead of the whine-fest that Race became.</p>
<p>Like, gemini, I felt like the mom didn’t see the other life choices that were contributing to the stress and was just looking for a convenient place to put the blame. Additionally, almost everyone she talked to was on a coast. There’s a whole country out there that doesn’t play some of the same games found in those communities.</p>
<p>vlines, Superman had a different focus. It was mostly about access to quality education, charters, tracking, etc. But it left a lot of information out. I found the information regarding the highly touted Harlem Zone charter to be incomplete, at best. That school has received massive infusions of money from private donors. I find it disingenuous to act like a charter anywhere could replicate its success.</p>
<p>I found Waiting for Superman less impressive than its buildup suggested but still very worthwhile to watch. It caught very well, imo, the horror of parenting kids locked in a terrible public school situation. I have lived that and I feel the film captured that very well.</p>
<p>Just accomplishing that was hugely impactful, imo.</p>
<p>Regarding APs – my kids both really enjoyed their APs. I don’t really get what the problem is except that many kids honestly have no business taking APs but their parents push them into it. It’s like the notion that every kid should go to college. In high school, there is the notion that every kid should take APs. That is ridiculous.</p>