If you are one who does NOT want to create a sense of superiority in your AAP accepted child

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the differences are negligible but the tracking is extreme.

This is it, in a nutshell. Sure, some kids are more advanced academically. But the current AAP system separates kids of *extremely similar* intelligence into two labeled groups. If it was an actual gifted program, it would only take the very highest scorers/achievers, and the vast majority of kids would be together in Gen Ed. with no hard feelings for the exceptional ones who would be receiving a special education. That's just not the case right now.

So there is a population of kids who are borderline. Thats ok. There will always be kids that just missed the cut off, that doesn't mean we should do away with the program.

There would be far fewer kids who "missed the cut off" if the cut off were raised. But that would just make too much sense.

The bar is fine. The numbers are high because of where we live. There is difference between the national average and the local average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They "don't give a hoot"

No. It matters to the kids. It matters to the parents. It affects peep groups and family/sibling relations to the core.

Because you are letting it.

Not the PP, but if your situation were reversed, as mentioned previously, you would feel the same way. You can deny it and make light of it all you want, since you're not in any danger of that happening, but it's absolutely true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the differences are negligible but the tracking is extreme.

This is it, in a nutshell. Sure, some kids are more advanced academically. But the current AAP system separates kids of *extremely similar* intelligence into two labeled groups. If it was an actual gifted program, it would only take the very highest scorers/achievers, and the vast majority of kids would be together in Gen Ed. with no hard feelings for the exceptional ones who would be receiving a special education. That's just not the case right now.

So there is a population of kids who are borderline. Thats ok. There will always be kids that just missed the cut off, that doesn't mean we should do away with the program.

There would be far fewer kids who "missed the cut off" if the cut off were raised. But that would just make too much sense.

The bar is fine. The numbers are high because of where we live. There is difference between the national average and the local average.

I disagree. The bar needs to be raised and it's only the parents who have kids who either squeaked in or had to be parent referred or appealed who feel "the bar is fine". Utter nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They "don't give a hoot"

No. It matters to the kids. It matters to the parents. It affects peep groups and family/sibling relations to the core.

Because you are letting it.

Not the PP, but if your situation were reversed, as mentioned previously, you would feel the same way. You can deny it and make light of it all you want, since you're not in any danger of that happening, but it's absolutely true.

You speak with such authority on how I would feel! "Absolutely true..." Really? I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. I am sorry that you feel the way you feel. Personally, I am not devastated if my kid doesn't make AAP, doesn't make a select team, doesn't win a beauty pageant, doesn't get invited to every birthday party...I don't need my kid to have a spot on any preferred list to know and love my child and believe in them. YOU decide what matters and YOU are deciding that AAP matters so much that it "affects peer groups and family/sibling relations to the core." In my family, there are an entirely different set of values that define our "core" and it certainly is not AAP eligibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the differences are negligible but the tracking is extreme.

This is it, in a nutshell. Sure, some kids are more advanced academically. But the current AAP system separates kids of *extremely similar* intelligence into two labeled groups. If it was an actual gifted program, it would only take the very highest scorers/achievers, and the vast majority of kids would be together in Gen Ed. with no hard feelings for the exceptional ones who would be receiving a special education. That's just not the case right now.

So there is a population of kids who are borderline. Thats ok. There will always be kids that just missed the cut off, that doesn't mean we should do away with the program.

There would be far fewer kids who "missed the cut off" if the cut off were raised. But that would just make too much sense.

The bar is fine. The numbers are high because of where we live. There is difference between the national average and the local average.

I disagree. The bar needs to be raised and it's only the parents who have kids who either squeaked in or had to be parent referred or appealed who feel "the bar is fine". Utter nonsense.

Well, I don't fit into any of those categories (squeaked, referred or appealed) and I think the bar is fine, so I guess there goes that theory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the differences are negligible but the tracking is extreme.

This is it, in a nutshell. Sure, some kids are more advanced academically. But the current AAP system separates kids of *extremely similar* intelligence into two labeled groups. If it was an actual gifted program, it would only take the very highest scorers/achievers, and the vast majority of kids would be together in Gen Ed. with no hard feelings for the exceptional ones who would be receiving a special education. That's just not the case right now.

So there is a population of kids who are borderline. Thats ok. There will always be kids that just missed the cut off, that doesn't mean we should do away with the program.

There would be far fewer kids who "missed the cut off" if the cut off were raised. But that would just make too much sense.

The bar is fine. The numbers are high because of where we live. There is difference between the national average and the local average.

I disagree. The bar needs to be raised and it's only the parents who have kids who either squeaked in or had to be parent referred or appealed who feel "the bar is fine". Utter nonsense.

Well, I don't fit into any of those categories (squeaked, referred or appealed) and I think the bar is fine, so I guess there goes that theory.

Right, because you say so. If all parents were given a vote on this issue, the results might surprise you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They "don't give a hoot"

No. It matters to the kids. It matters to the parents. It affects peep groups and family/sibling relations to the core.

Because you are letting it.

Not the PP, but if your situation were reversed, as mentioned previously, you would feel the same way. You can deny it and make light of it all you want, since you're not in any danger of that happening, but it's absolutely true.

I am 110 percent positive I would not feel that way. It is a childish perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the differences are negligible but the tracking is extreme.

This is it, in a nutshell. Sure, some kids are more advanced academically. But the current AAP system separates kids of *extremely similar* intelligence into two labeled groups. If it was an actual gifted program, it would only take the very highest scorers/achievers, and the vast majority of kids would be together in Gen Ed. with no hard feelings for the exceptional ones who would be receiving a special education. That's just not the case right now.

So there is a population of kids who are borderline. Thats ok. There will always be kids that just missed the cut off, that doesn't mean we should do away with the program.

There would be far fewer kids who "missed the cut off" if the cut off were raised. But that would just make too much sense.

The bar is fine. The numbers are high because of where we live. There is difference between the national average and the local average.

I disagree. The bar needs to be raised and it's only the parents who have kids who either squeaked in or had to be parent referred or appealed who feel "the bar is fine". Utter nonsense.

Well, I don't fit into any of those categories (squeaked, referred or appealed) and I think the bar is fine, so I guess there goes that theory.

Right, because you say so. If all parents were given a vote on this issue, the results might surprise you.

You said "its ONLY the parents who.." and obviously that is not true since of am one and surely not the one singular example out there of a parent who disagrees with you and not because my child either "squeaked in", was referrred or appealed.

If alll parents were given a vote on this issue, I don't think the results would surprise me. There is a reason things are decided they way they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the differences are negligible but the tracking is extreme.

This is it, in a nutshell. Sure, some kids are more advanced academically. But the current AAP system separates kids of *extremely similar* intelligence into two labeled groups. If it was an actual gifted program, it would only take the very highest scorers/achievers, and the vast majority of kids would be together in Gen Ed. with no hard feelings for the exceptional ones who would be receiving a special education. That's just not the case right now.

So there is a population of kids who are borderline. Thats ok. There will always be kids that just missed the cut off, that doesn't mean we should do away with the program.

There would be far fewer kids who "missed the cut off" if the cut off were raised. But that would just make too much sense.

The bar is fine. The numbers are high because of where we live. There is difference between the national average and the local average.

I disagree. The bar needs to be raised and it's only the parents who have kids who either squeaked in or had to be parent referred or appealed who feel "the bar is fine". Utter nonsense.

Well, I don't fit into any of those categories (squeaked, referred or appealed) and I think the bar is fine, so I guess there goes that theory.

Right, because you say so. If all parents were given a vote on this issue, the results might surprise you.

You said "its ONLY the parents who.." and obviously that is not true since of am one and surely not the one singular example out there of a parent who disagrees with you and not because my child either "squeaked in", was referrred or appealed.

If alll parents were given a vote on this issue, I don't think the results would surprise me. There is a reason things are decided they way they are.

Yes. The reason is that certain parents want AAP to exist. Since they are used to speaking the loudest and getting their way, AAP exists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the differences are negligible but the tracking is extreme.

This is it, in a nutshell. Sure, some kids are more advanced academically. But the current AAP system separates kids of *extremely similar* intelligence into two labeled groups. If it was an actual gifted program, it would only take the very highest scorers/achievers, and the vast majority of kids would be together in Gen Ed. with no hard feelings for the exceptional ones who would be receiving a special education. That's just not the case right now.

So there is a population of kids who are borderline. Thats ok. There will always be kids that just missed the cut off, that doesn't mean we should do away with the program.

There would be far fewer kids who "missed the cut off" if the cut off were raised. But that would just make too much sense.

The bar is fine. The numbers are high because of where we live. There is difference between the national average and the local average.

I disagree. The bar needs to be raised and it's only the parents who have kids who either squeaked in or had to be parent referred or appealed who feel "the bar is fine". Utter nonsense.

Well, I don't fit into any of those categories (squeaked, referred or appealed) and I think the bar is fine, so I guess there goes that theory.

I also don't fit into one of those categories and feel the bar is fine. We live in a highly educated area of the country. Highly educated = smart parents. Smart parents = smart kids. I would expect there to be more kids in AAP than the national average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the differences are negligible but the tracking is extreme.

This is it, in a nutshell. Sure, some kids are more advanced academically. But the current AAP system separates kids of *extremely similar* intelligence into two labeled groups. If it was an actual gifted program, it would only take the very highest scorers/achievers, and the vast majority of kids would be together in Gen Ed. with no hard feelings for the exceptional ones who would be receiving a special education. That's just not the case right now.

So there is a population of kids who are borderline. Thats ok. There will always be kids that just missed the cut off, that doesn't mean we should do away with the program.

There would be far fewer kids who "missed the cut off" if the cut off were raised. But that would just make too much sense.

The bar is fine. The numbers are high because of where we live. There is difference between the national average and the local average.

I disagree. The bar needs to be raised and it's only the parents who have kids who either squeaked in or had to be parent referred or appealed who feel "the bar is fine". Utter nonsense.

Well, I don't fit into any of those categories (squeaked, referred or appealed) and I think the bar is fine, so I guess there goes that theory.

I also don't fit into one of those categories and feel the bar is fine. We live in a highly educated area of the country. Highly educated = smart parents. Smart parents = smart kids. I would expect there to be more kids in AAP than the national average.[/quote]

It is true that we live in a highly educated area and compared to the national average there are more smart kids. That said, if you ask any teacher or educator who has been around here awhile they will tell you that there are many kids getting into the program now who would not have gotten in (and whose parents wouldn't have pushed for it) back when the program was more geared to "gifted" students. The whole reason the GT program was created is that research has shown time and again that these students learn differently and FCPS needed to bus them to centers to find a critical mass.

Todays AAP program is hard to justify for the following reasons:

1. Students can be high-achieving, or advanced because of what they've been exposed to without being gifted. Do these kids really learn differently and need a separate program?
2. With 40% of the second grade class making the cut for AAP in some schools, can anyone argue in good faith that these students need to be bused to a center to find a critical mass of their intellectual peers?


I honestly don't know how FCPS and so many parents on this forum can justify this bloated program with a straight face.

[Anonymous]

It is true that we live in a highly educated area and compared to the national average there are more smart kids. That said, if you ask any teacher or educator who has been around here awhile they will tell you that there are many kids getting into the program now who would not have gotten in (and whose parents wouldn't have pushed for it) back when the program was more geared to "gifted" students. The whole reason the GT program was created is that research has shown time and again that these students learn differently and FCPS needed to bus them to centers to find a critical mass.

Todays AAP program is hard to justify for the following reasons:

1. Students can be high-achieving, or advanced because of what they've been exposed to without being gifted. Do these kids really learn differently and need a separate program?
2. With 40% of the second grade class making the cut for AAP in some schools, can anyone argue in good faith that these students need to be bused to a center to find a critical mass of their intellectual peers?


I honestly don't know how FCPS and so many parents on this forum can justify this bloated program with a straight face.

[Anonymous]

I also agree with PP that is the parents of kids who would not have made the cut for the GT program who are the primary supporters of today's AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is true that we live in a highly educated area and compared to the national average there are more smart kids. That said, if you ask any teacher or educator who has been around here awhile they will tell you that there are many kids getting into the program now who would not have gotten in (and whose parents wouldn't have pushed for it) back when the program was more geared to "gifted" students. The whole reason the GT program was created is that research has shown time and again that these students learn differently and FCPS needed to bus them to centers to find a critical mass.

Todays AAP program is hard to justify for the following reasons:

1. Students can be high-achieving, or advanced because of what they've been exposed to without being gifted. Do these kids really learn differently and need a separate program?
2. With 40% of the second grade class making the cut for AAP in some schools, can anyone argue in good faith that these students need to be bused to a center to find a critical mass of their intellectual peers?


I honestly don't know how FCPS and so many parents on this forum can justify this bloated program with a straight face.

Completely agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the differences are negligible but the tracking is extreme.

This is it, in a nutshell. Sure, some kids are more advanced academically. But the current AAP system separates kids of *extremely similar* intelligence into two labeled groups. If it was an actual gifted program, it would only take the very highest scorers/achievers, and the vast majority of kids would be together in Gen Ed. with no hard feelings for the exceptional ones who would be receiving a special education. That's just not the case right now.

So there is a population of kids who are borderline. Thats ok. There will always be kids that just missed the cut off, that doesn't mean we should do away with the program.

There would be far fewer kids who "missed the cut off" if the cut off were raised. But that would just make too much sense.

The bar is fine. The numbers are high because of where we live. There is difference between the national average and the local average.

I agree with this. I live in a suburb in Texas where a score in the range of 125-130 plus on any of the Cogat subtests or the NNAT will get your child into GT programming. My child's school has only 5% of students who meet that standard. A more affluent elementary school in the same school district admits twice as many based on the same standard. The genetic pool and environment in wealthier areas makes a big difference. My GT identified child only scored high on one subtest (129), the rest were in the above average range (112-121), but he belongs in the program because he is significantly ahead of the other kids. In your school district, I have no doubt that he would be quite average.