What are the likely implications of AAP being dismantled?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

This.
It’s a nice idea, but the curriculum is not the right match to meet each kid where they are.
Diversity needs to be honored at every level, and sometimes the spectrum of reading level or grasp of a foundational math concept isn’t there yet to be able to forge into deeper more complex thinking or exploration of a topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

Raising the bar and expectations makes everyone advanced.

Absolutely raise the bar.
And expect ALL students to just dig in and do the work.
Every single kid, no matter his prior experiences or learning success or reading level or math comprehension should be held to the same high standard as outlined in Level IV curriculum.

(Ummmmmmmmmm………Does that sound remotely like anything that fcps is doing at all for the past 5-8 years?)

Yeah…. that’s not what is happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

Another teacher here. I think the schools that have a separate Level 4 class is exactly the same as the center. The cluster model is another story. But it irritates me beyond belief that parents can choose to send their kids to a school that they believe is better when the surrounding schools offer a dedicated LL4 class. Our school averages between 12-24 center eligible kids per year. This is a middle of the road diverse school.

I think it's because in the end AAP was always just about segregation more than education.

Sadly cynical take.

I’m all for opening up AAP for any kid who wants to try to meet the challenge.
I happen to think you’ll get the same outcome, though, as when kids self-select into AP and IB classes in high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

Another teacher here. I think the schools that have a separate Level 4 class is exactly the same as the center. The cluster model is another story. But it irritates me beyond belief that parents can choose to send their kids to a school that they believe is better when the surrounding schools offer a dedicated LL4 class. Our school averages between 12-24 center eligible kids per year. This is a middle of the road diverse school.

I think it's because in the end AAP was always just about segregation more than education.

Sadly cynical take.

I’m all for opening up AAP for any kid who wants to try to meet the challenge.
I happen to think you’ll get the same outcome, though, as when kids self-select into AP and IB classes in high school.

I disagree. This is why honors classes are watered down in middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

Another teacher here. I think the schools that have a separate Level 4 class is exactly the same as the center. The cluster model is another story. But it irritates me beyond belief that parents can choose to send their kids to a school that they believe is better when the surrounding schools offer a dedicated LL4 class. Our school averages between 12-24 center eligible kids per year. This is a middle of the road diverse school.

I think it's because in the end AAP was always just about segregation more than education.

Sadly cynical take.

I’m all for opening up AAP for any kid who wants to try to meet the challenge.
I happen to think you’ll get the same outcome, though, as when kids self-select into AP and IB classes in high school.

Not really. AAP was just an end-run around desegregation. It's not a gifted program, just a way to separate kids from families with resources from everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

Another teacher here. I think the schools that have a separate Level 4 class is exactly the same as the center. The cluster model is another story. But it irritates me beyond belief that parents can choose to send their kids to a school that they believe is better when the surrounding schools offer a dedicated LL4 class. Our school averages between 12-24 center eligible kids per year. This is a middle of the road diverse school.

I think it's because in the end AAP was always just about segregation more than education.

Sadly cynical take.

I’m all for opening up AAP for any kid who wants to try to meet the challenge.
I happen to think you’ll get the same outcome, though, as when kids self-select into AP and IB classes in high school.

I disagree. This is why honors classes are watered down in middle school.

Wrong again. Those classes are watered up since they help raise the bar for all students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, the district is far too large for that. At the HS level, students and parents can make the decision to endure the extended travel for that experience, but that's way too much to put on 8-and-9-yo kids. Even region doesn't make sense because in some cases the regions aren't geographically clustered (e.g. Region 5 has both Tysons and Dulles)

Mmm… FCPS does that for dual language immersion program and parents are willing to drive around 6 year olds…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

Another teacher here. I think the schools that have a separate Level 4 class is exactly the same as the center. The cluster model is another story. But it irritates me beyond belief that parents can choose to send their kids to a school that they believe is better when the surrounding schools offer a dedicated LL4 class. Our school averages between 12-24 center eligible kids per year. This is a middle of the road diverse school.

I think it's because in the end AAP was always just about segregation more than education.

Sadly cynical take.

I’m all for opening up AAP for any kid who wants to try to meet the challenge.
I happen to think you’ll get the same outcome, though, as when kids self-select into AP and IB classes in high school.

I disagree. This is why honors classes are watered down in middle school.

The fix here is to not take an 'everyone must pass' approach for the advanced classes. If the kids cannot handle the material/pacing, it is OK to fail them if they insist on staying in the class, or encourage them to go back to the regular level class where they can handle the workload. But from what I've seen, the schools seem overly motivated to not fail kids - this leads to teachers being pressured to focus on bringing up the bottom instead of teaching to the top and expecting everyone to keep up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

Raising the bar and expectations makes everyone advanced.

No it doesn't. DS is in LLIV. Last year they made his teacher instruct two different levels of math in the same classroom because not enough kids had qualified for advanced math to have a full class. It resulted in no one getting what they needed -- DS would occasionally be partnered with kid getting on grade level math instead of advanced math. Nice kids. They would get very frustrated and tell him: I'm sorry, I can't help with the assignment, I don't understand it and I can't do it.

DS would come home annoyed that he had to complete all the supposedly partner work himself (having no idea there were kids getting 2 diff levels of math in one class). Teacher was pulled in 2 directions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

Raising the bar and expectations makes everyone advanced.

Honors for all is one proven way this has been accomplished.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

Raising the bar and expectations makes everyone advanced.

No it doesn't. DS is in LLIV. Last year they made his teacher instruct two different levels of math in the same classroom because not enough kids had qualified for advanced math to have a full class. It resulted in no one getting what they needed -- DS would occasionally be partnered with kid getting on grade level math instead of advanced math. Nice kids. They would get very frustrated and tell him: I'm sorry, I can't help with the assignment, I don't understand it and I can't do it.

DS would come home annoyed that he had to complete all the supposedly partner work himself (having no idea there were kids getting 2 diff levels of math in one class). Teacher was pulled in 2 directions.

You do realize that the people making the people commenting that honors for all/raising the bar makes everyone advanced are trolling you, right? They are posting looking to poke at you and get a response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

Raising the bar and expectations makes everyone advanced.

Honors for all is one proven way this has been accomplished.

Sorry doesn’t work that way no matter how many times you say it. Honors for all is just gened with a different name.

AAP is gated and helps ensure most kids enrolled are reasonably capable of keeping up, thankfully. They are working on tearing down those gates, though. Soon, it will be gened with a different name as well.

In middle or high school, you used to have to get approval from the guidance counselor to switch into GT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “dismantle AAP” crowd are privileged white parents angry that their precious snowflakes didn’t get accepted into the program.

And LLIV is not Level 4. It’s a watered down version of an already watered down program that inevitably brings more children of various capabilities into a classroom and forces the teacher to teach to the bottom. The only equity achieved is that everyone loses.

No, it's not.

I teach LLIV, and 100% of my students are center-eligible. We do not water down the curriculum by any means. My daughter is in LIV at a center (which happens to be our base school), and the curriculum has been identical between what she's done at the center and what we've done at the LLIV level.

That’s because you have a principal and teachers doing it correctly. There are AWESOME local level 4 teachers and programs that are absolutely comparable to centers. Unfortunately, a lot of local level IV programs are not anything like this.

At a recent AAP lead meeting I sat with LL4 teachers who had kids reading at the first grade level in their fifth grade classes, as well as ELL level 2 kids. They were by necessity spending the majority of their time with those kids. (Who absolutely deserve services!! And it would be much more effective to not split the teacher’s energy and time like that!)

Also, many if not most local level 4 schools won’t have a full class— I teach at a center. Without the kids from our feeders, we would only have 8-15 eligible kids per grade level. This isn’t a huge issue IF the class is rounded out with advanced math/level 3 kids, but again, principals have a huge amount of leeway here.

I think the biggest roadblock for the county will be numbers. Getting rid of centers will seriously overcrowd some base schools and empty out some centers. My center school has lost a ton of kids— close to 200 over 10 years— as several of our feeders also became centers or got LL4. A lot of centers are still very full. Boundary redraws are going to be needed.

Another solution would be to offer LLIV for All, where all students are elevated to this level and receive the enriched material.

If everyone is advanced, no one is. I agree that they should offer the curriculum to all but still track students in different cohorts based on ability.

Raising the bar and expectations makes everyone advanced.

No it doesn't. DS is in LLIV. Last year they made his teacher instruct two different levels of math in the same classroom because not enough kids had qualified for advanced math to have a full class. It resulted in no one getting what they needed -- DS would occasionally be partnered with kid getting on grade level math instead of advanced math. Nice kids. They would get very frustrated and tell him: I'm sorry, I can't help with the assignment, I don't understand it and I can't do it.

DS would come home annoyed that he had to complete all the supposedly partner work himself (having no idea there were kids getting 2 diff levels of math in one class). Teacher was pulled in 2 directions.

You do realize that the people making the people commenting that honors for all/raising the bar makes everyone advanced are trolling you, right? They are posting looking to poke at you and get a response.

DP, this is most likely true, but the cynic in me says they are astroturfing at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: AAP currently has only different subjects like math, science, social studies, and English, and only advanced learners are getting to be part of it. But Equity requires everyone be part of AAP. So FCPS is considering adding other relatively easier subjects like painting, music, drama, crafts, etc., to AAP, so that remaing kids can be enrolled into atleast one of these namesake classes. That way everyone is part of AAP. Equity problem solved!

I guess that’s sarcasm, but it actually sounds really smart. Where magnet schools have differentiated this way it has been very successful. Not everyone has to become a stem major despite what parents seem to think.