Coincidentally, my day job is teaching AP classes, and at this time of year as my students are making their final decisions about next year's classes, I am constantly encouraging them to challenge themselves by continuing to take the AP classes still available to them.
On the other hand--and this has become somewhat of an issue--there has been a push to eliminate choices for these students...scheduling changes that make it next-to-impossible for students to take one or more AP classes without taking ALL AP classes. And I'm against taking away that choice, because for one thing, it may turn students away from starting an AP journey if they know they are locked into it with reduced choices. If a child takes AP Language, does that mean they MUST also take AP Calculus? Why must it be both or neither? Why not attempt to allow them to take advantage of every challenging opportunity available in one semester without making it contingent on other semesters and courses?
Example: A student wants to take Marine Science in the spring. It's not offered at the AP level, but the student is really interested in that curriculum. However, it conflicts with AP Calculus, but not with Honors Calculus. Do we tell the student he can't take AP Literature in the fall unless he also commits to AP Calculus in the spring--foregoing Marine Science?
What I am against is exactly what you claim to be--taking away choices and avenues to excel. Choices don't have to be either-or, all-or-nothing, especially when there are lifelong benefits to both sides of a choice.
A question to which I really don't know the answer is this: Would the Development Academy activities in the spring be so time-intensive that a player literally could not participate in the Academy and high school ball, as long as the high school coaches are willing to share time for the benefit of the player? Or are there other reasons for not wanting to allow both?
