The difference btw the AAP class and the General Ed class

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:True to the above but I've found Local level to be watered down.

We have one kid at the center and one in local level IV. The center is definitely more rigorous than our specific elementary. The situation may be different for others.

How so? Can you give specific examples?

The math moves faster for sure. We had a kid transfer from LLIV to the center after 3rd and they were behind the rest of the class--a number of concepts hadn't been covered. Center also has way more homework. Our LLIV program is a cluster model and the kids don't get LIV LA/science/SS every day. LIV LA is only twice a week and science/SS is only once. On off-days they get the gen ed curriculum. Center gets LIV material in every subject every day.

It looks like your situation is school specific. I have a kid at a LL4 and they have a class filled with Level 4 and 3 students. Math is at the same pace as my neighbor’s kid at the center. We have kids come back from the center every year. I think a lot comes down to the following: how Level 4 is structured, school community and teacher. We have been so impressed with our kid’s teachers at our LL4.

This is part of the problem. The quality of LLIV programming seems to vary tremendously From one school to the next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:True to the above but I've found Local level to be watered down.

We have one kid at the center and one in local level IV. The center is definitely more rigorous than our specific elementary. The situation may be different for others.

How so? Can you give specific examples?

The math moves faster for sure. We had a kid transfer from LLIV to the center after 3rd and they were behind the rest of the class--a number of concepts hadn't been covered. Center also has way more homework. Our LLIV program is a cluster model and the kids don't get LIV LA/science/SS every day. LIV LA is only twice a week and science/SS is only once. On off-days they get the gen ed curriculum. Center gets LIV material in every subject every day.

It looks like your situation is school specific. I have a kid at a LL4 and they have a class filled with Level 4 and 3 students. Math is at the same pace as my neighbor’s kid at the center. We have kids come back from the center every year. I think a lot comes down to the following: how Level 4 is structured, school community and teacher. We have been so impressed with our kid’s teachers at our LL4.

This is part of the problem. The quality of LLIV programming seems to vary tremendously From one school to the next.

Yes, but you cannot control school dynamics and teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:True to the above but I've found Local level to be watered down.

We have one kid at the center and one in local level IV. The center is definitely more rigorous than our specific elementary. The situation may be different for others.

How so? Can you give specific examples?

I was pretty concerned about this when I kept my kid at a local level IV school. But now she is at an AAP MS and doing really well. I've heard that center schools have more busy work/homework. The homework amount has been the only adjustment.

Not PP but we had experienced less work in the form of reading and writing for my youngest. Oldest went to the not-so-high poverty center but my youngest opted to stay with friends at higher poverty MS. The high poverty MS chose to eliminate novels as required reading. Homework was eliminated. If anything was assigned, there was time to do it in class. Kids were encouraged to write what they wanted just so they write SOMETHING. My youngest only received praise. No critical analysis essays on subjects they didn't know or topics requiring a bit of research. Also, the free study period was broken out differently at the center. The center had one class that met daily but was split with the study time so kids remained in their respective classes. High poverty MS had an entire 90 minute block where all grades were mixed in classes and spent most of the time talking about how to behave better.

Ah ok. My kid when from a local level IV ES to a center MS. I don’t know about regular MS schools.

PP here - my youngest at the high poverty MS was in local level IV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:True to the above but I've found Local level to be watered down.

We have one kid at the center and one in local level IV. The center is definitely more rigorous than our specific elementary. The situation may be different for others.

How so? Can you give specific examples?

The math moves faster for sure. We had a kid transfer from LLIV to the center after 3rd and they were behind the rest of the class--a number of concepts hadn't been covered. Center also has way more homework. Our LLIV program is a cluster model and the kids don't get LIV LA/science/SS every day. LIV LA is only twice a week and science/SS is only once. On off-days they get the gen ed curriculum. Center gets LIV material in every subject every day.

It looks like your situation is school specific. I have a kid at a LL4 and they have a class filled with Level 4 and 3 students. Math is at the same pace as my neighbor’s kid at the center. We have kids come back from the center every year. I think a lot comes down to the following: how Level 4 is structured, school community and teacher. We have been so impressed with our kid’s teachers at our LL4.

This is part of the problem. The quality of LLIV programming seems to vary tremendously From one school to the next.

Yes, but you cannot control school dynamics and teachers.

You can't control teachers but FCPS could be more prescriptive about the way LLIV is administered. Kids should be getting LIV instruction every day in every subject as they do at the centers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^I am speaking from personal experience. It wasn’t an advanced class but a class only offered at the school virtually. It was a simple “Sorry, it’s filled.” They gave my kid two other completely unrelated options that would fit in his schedule. It’s about what fits in, not what you want at that point. We certainly weren’t demanding a class spot and bus transportation. Lesson learned, we are already researching other virtual options outside of FCPS for next year.

I firmly think they need to stop the transportation for AAP centers and one of mine went through AAP but stayed at the base school. There are so many other things to spend the money on.

No way they’re going to do this. It’s an equity issue. You’d basically be excluding all the kids whose parents don’t have the resources to drive them every day.

Okay. But there are centers that have every school with a Local Level 4. For example, every school that sends to Westbriar has a Local Level 4. Why should we be bussing kids when they can get a Level 4 class at their own school?

The argument is that the Center schools allow for more classrooms so that the kids can be mixed up every year, just like the Gen Ed classes are shuffled every year. It is better for socialization for kids to have a larger cohort of kids and gives room to keep kids who clash apart.

I think the solution is that you have Advanced Math and Advanced LA in every school. Maybe it is Advanced Math and Science and Advanced LA and Social Studies since there are overlapping skill sets in the classes. Allow kids to move classes based on their areas of strength. Since many schoolshave 3 or more classrooms for each grade, you should be able to keep classes balanced in size and skill set. It would allow more kids to be challenged in their areas of strength. For even larger schools you would end up with 2 advanced classrooms for each of the areas.

The fluidity would be good for all kids and you wouldn’t have to worry about the cohort issues. You could also adjust the kids in each group annually so that kids who start to advance later in ES. It would also allow kids who were on the cusp and are struggling to be moved back into a group that works for them. You also remove the designation and hence the competitive aspect of LIV, that is ridiculous. LIII goes away, since there is Advanced LA, which allows the AART to do more with the LII type kids in K-2 and to provide support for the truly gifted kids who need more then Advanced Math or LA provides.

And you get rid of the Centers and busses and relieve over crowding at some of the Center schools.

+100
I've been wishing they would do something like this for years.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^I am speaking from personal experience. It wasn’t an advanced class but a class only offered at the school virtually. It was a simple “Sorry, it’s filled.” They gave my kid two other completely unrelated options that would fit in his schedule. It’s about what fits in, not what you want at that point. We certainly weren’t demanding a class spot and bus transportation. Lesson learned, we are already researching other virtual options outside of FCPS for next year.

I firmly think they need to stop the transportation for AAP centers and one of mine went through AAP but stayed at the base school. There are so many other things to spend the money on.

No way they’re going to do this. It’s an equity issue. You’d basically be excluding all the kids whose parents don’t have the resources to drive them every day.

Okay. But there are centers that have every school with a Local Level 4. For example, every school that sends to Westbriar has a Local Level 4. Why should we be bussing kids when they can get a Level 4 class at their own school?

The argument is that the Center schools allow for more classrooms so that the kids can be mixed up every year, just like the Gen Ed classes are shuffled every year. It is better for socialization for kids to have a larger cohort of kids and gives room to keep kids who clash apart.

I think the solution is that you have Advanced Math and Advanced LA in every school. Maybe it is Advanced Math and Science and Advanced LA and Social Studies since there are overlapping skill sets in the classes. Allow kids to move classes based on their areas of strength. Since many schoolshave 3 or more classrooms for each grade, you should be able to keep classes balanced in size and skill set. It would allow more kids to be challenged in their areas of strength. For even larger schools you would end up with 2 advanced classrooms for each of the areas.

The fluidity would be good for all kids and you wouldn’t have to worry about the cohort issues. You could also adjust the kids in each group annually so that kids who start to advance later in ES. It would also allow kids who were on the cusp and are struggling to be moved back into a group that works for them. You also remove the designation and hence the competitive aspect of LIV, that is ridiculous. LIII goes away, since there is Advanced LA, which allows the AART to do more with the LII type kids in K-2 and to provide support for the truly gifted kids who need more then Advanced Math or LA provides.

And you get rid of the Centers and busses and relieve over crowding at some of the Center schools.

+100
I've been wishing they would do something like this for years.
DP

This was how my podunk ES did it in the 80's in of those open concept schools. And by golly it worked.

[Anonymous]

Imagine being too dumb to realize that intelligence is rewarded in our society, and is also hereditary. Therefore rich people have smarter kids. Go read some research and get edumacated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^I am speaking from personal experience. It wasn’t an advanced class but a class only offered at the school virtually. It was a simple “Sorry, it’s filled.” They gave my kid two other completely unrelated options that would fit in his schedule. It’s about what fits in, not what you want at that point. We certainly weren’t demanding a class spot and bus transportation. Lesson learned, we are already researching other virtual options outside of FCPS for next year.

I firmly think they need to stop the transportation for AAP centers and one of mine went through AAP but stayed at the base school. There are so many other things to spend the money on.

No way they’re going to do this. It’s an equity issue. You’d basically be excluding all the kids whose parents don’t have the resources to drive them every day.

Okay. But there are centers that have every school with a Local Level 4. For example, every school that sends to Westbriar has a Local Level 4. Why should we be bussing kids when they can get a Level 4 class at their own school?

The argument is that the Center schools allow for more classrooms so that the kids can be mixed up every year, just like the Gen Ed classes are shuffled every year. It is better for socialization for kids to have a larger cohort of kids and gives room to keep kids who clash apart.

I think the solution is that you have Advanced Math and Advanced LA in every school. Maybe it is Advanced Math and Science and Advanced LA and Social Studies since there are overlapping skill sets in the classes. Allow kids to move classes based on their areas of strength. Since many schoolshave 3 or more classrooms for each grade, you should be able to keep classes balanced in size and skill set. It would allow more kids to be challenged in their areas of strength. For even larger schools you would end up with 2 advanced classrooms for each of the areas.

The fluidity would be good for all kids and you wouldn’t have to worry about the cohort issues. You could also adjust the kids in each group annually so that kids who start to advance later in ES. It would also allow kids who were on the cusp and are struggling to be moved back into a group that works for them. You also remove the designation and hence the competitive aspect of LIV, that is ridiculous. LIII goes away, since there is Advanced LA, which allows the AART to do more with the LII type kids in K-2 and to provide support for the truly gifted kids who need more then Advanced Math or LA provides.

And you get rid of the Centers and busses and relieve over crowding at some of the Center schools.

+100
I've been wishing they would do something like this for years.
DP

This was how my podunk ES did it in the 80's in of those open concept schools. And by golly it worked.

But this is tracking which is deemed Inequitable. There should be some sort of testing to determine who gets what but my suspicion is that it will be ignored. Fcps has already called out the low numbers of POC and low income in AAP and the goal is to even it out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Imagine being too dumb to realize that intelligence is rewarded in our society, and is also hereditary. Therefore rich people have smarter kids. Go read some research and get edumacated.

For someone who I assume is educated and thinks of herself or himself as smart, you have a problem with logic. Firstly, intelligence is not always rewarded in our country. Intelligence does not always correspond to money (which is how you view success?). Just ask very smart people in academia, research, healthcare, non-profits, etc. Furthermore, kids who are born into UMC and UC are born already way ahead of the game. Go read the Money forum about how UMC parents ensure their kids will be set up to be ahead financially in the long run. Actually you can read any of the forums in DCUM and see how the UMC can help their kids out in various ways. Paying for therapy. Setting up college funds. Appealing AAP decisions. Paying for ECs. Providing enrichment. And the really UC-those people are are WAY ahead already. The connections their parents have opens all sorts of doors. Not to mention your argument completely falls through for all the people who came from nothing and then do in fact succeed. People who are born on third base and think they hit a triple are so very clueless. And yes, my kids are in AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine being too dumb to realize that intelligence is rewarded in our society, and is also hereditary. Therefore rich people have smarter kids. Go read some research and get edumacated.

For someone who I assume is educated and thinks of herself or himself as smart, you have a problem with logic. Firstly, intelligence is not always rewarded in our country. Intelligence does not always correspond to money (which is how you view success?). Just ask very smart people in academia, research, healthcare, non-profits, etc. Furthermore, kids who are born into UMC and UC are born already way ahead of the game. Go read the Money forum about how UMC parents ensure their kids will be set up to be ahead financially in the long run. Actually you can read any of the forums in DCUM and see how the UMC can help their kids out in various ways. Paying for therapy. Setting up college funds. Appealing AAP decisions. Paying for ECs. Providing enrichment. And the really UC-those people are are WAY ahead already. The connections their parents have opens all sorts of doors. Not to mention your argument completely falls through for all the people who came from nothing and then do in fact succeed. People who are born on third base and think they hit a triple are so very clueless. And yes, my kids are in AAP.

NP. Sorry, but PP is right, on average. The AAP program, by its universal testing design, is supposed to seek out and find the outliers. And tbh, I think it does find nearly all of them, but there aren't that many.

Methinks you're protesting too much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine being too dumb to realize that intelligence is rewarded in our society, and is also hereditary. Therefore rich people have smarter kids. Go read some research and get edumacated.

For someone who I assume is educated and thinks of herself or himself as smart, you have a problem with logic. Firstly, intelligence is not always rewarded in our country. Intelligence does not always correspond to money (which is how you view success?). Just ask very smart people in academia, research, healthcare, non-profits, etc. Furthermore, kids who are born into UMC and UC are born already way ahead of the game. Go read the Money forum about how UMC parents ensure their kids will be set up to be ahead financially in the long run. Actually you can read any of the forums in DCUM and see how the UMC can help their kids out in various ways. Paying for therapy. Setting up college funds. Appealing AAP decisions. Paying for ECs. Providing enrichment. And the really UC-those people are are WAY ahead already. The connections their parents have opens all sorts of doors. Not to mention your argument completely falls through for all the people who came from nothing and then do in fact succeed. People who are born on third base and think they hit a triple are so very clueless. And yes, my kids are in AAP.

NP. Sorry, but PP is right, on average. The AAP program, by its universal testing design, is supposed to seek out and find the outliers. And tbh, I think it does find nearly all of them, but there aren't that many.

Methinks you're protesting too much.

+1, there are test scores to identify them and/or GBRS for those who don’t test well. If intelligent, minority, low social-economic kids are missed in FCPS, it’s few and far between (AAP Teacher)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine being too dumb to realize that intelligence is rewarded in our society, and is also hereditary. Therefore rich people have smarter kids. Go read some research and get edumacated.

For someone who I assume is educated and thinks of herself or himself as smart, you have a problem with logic. Firstly, intelligence is not always rewarded in our country. Intelligence does not always correspond to money (which is how you view success?). Just ask very smart people in academia, research, healthcare, non-profits, etc. Furthermore, kids who are born into UMC and UC are born already way ahead of the game. Go read the Money forum about how UMC parents ensure their kids will be set up to be ahead financially in the long run. Actually you can read any of the forums in DCUM and see how the UMC can help their kids out in various ways. Paying for therapy. Setting up college funds. Appealing AAP decisions. Paying for ECs. Providing enrichment. And the really UC-those people are are WAY ahead already. The connections their parents have opens all sorts of doors. Not to mention your argument completely falls through for all the people who came from nothing and then do in fact succeed. People who are born on third base and think they hit a triple are so very clueless. And yes, my kids are in AAP.

NP. Sorry, but PP is right, on average. The AAP program, by its universal testing design, is supposed to seek out and find the outliers. And tbh, I think it does find nearly all of them, but there aren't that many.

Methinks you're protesting too much.

Not protesting. Just calling out the BS that wealthy people are wealthy just bc of intelligence and/or "hard work." Again my kids are in AAP. But I acknowledge my and my kids' privilege. The ones who fail to acknowledge this and think that their kids are so special and gifted are the ones usually protesting when they get called on their BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine being too dumb to realize that intelligence is rewarded in our society, and is also hereditary. Therefore rich people have smarter kids. Go read some research and get edumacated.

For someone who I assume is educated and thinks of herself or himself as smart, you have a problem with logic. Firstly, intelligence is not always rewarded in our country. Intelligence does not always correspond to money (which is how you view success?). Just ask very smart people in academia, research, healthcare, non-profits, etc. Furthermore, kids who are born into UMC and UC are born already way ahead of the game. Go read the Money forum about how UMC parents ensure their kids will be set up to be ahead financially in the long run. Actually you can read any of the forums in DCUM and see how the UMC can help their kids out in various ways. Paying for therapy. Setting up college funds. Appealing AAP decisions. Paying for ECs. Providing enrichment. And the really UC-those people are are WAY ahead already. The connections their parents have opens all sorts of doors. Not to mention your argument completely falls through for all the people who came from nothing and then do in fact succeed. People who are born on third base and think they hit a triple are so very clueless. And yes, my kids are in AAP.

NP. Sorry, but PP is right, on average. The AAP program, by its universal testing design, is supposed to seek out and find the outliers. And tbh, I think it does find nearly all of them, but there aren't that many.

Methinks you're protesting too much.

+1, there are test scores to identify them and/or GBRS for those who don’t test well. If intelligent, minority, low social-economic kids are missed in FCPS, it’s few and far between (AAP Teacher)

You are a teacher and you don't think that a kids home environment is going to impact test scores and a GRBS (which is subjective) rating? That the opportunities a kid's been given up until that point has nothing to do with it? Or that the parents appealing AAP decisions aren't from a certain SES? Oy vey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine being too dumb to realize that intelligence is rewarded in our society, and is also hereditary. Therefore rich people have smarter kids. Go read some research and get edumacated.

For someone who I assume is educated and thinks of herself or himself as smart, you have a problem with logic. Firstly, intelligence is not always rewarded in our country. Intelligence does not always correspond to money (which is how you view success?). Just ask very smart people in academia, research, healthcare, non-profits, etc. Furthermore, kids who are born into UMC and UC are born already way ahead of the game. Go read the Money forum about how UMC parents ensure their kids will be set up to be ahead financially in the long run. Actually you can read any of the forums in DCUM and see how the UMC can help their kids out in various ways. Paying for therapy. Setting up college funds. Appealing AAP decisions. Paying for ECs. Providing enrichment. And the really UC-those people are are WAY ahead already. The connections their parents have opens all sorts of doors. Not to mention your argument completely falls through for all the people who came from nothing and then do in fact succeed. People who are born on third base and think they hit a triple are so very clueless. And yes, my kids are in AAP.

NP. Sorry, but PP is right, on average. The AAP program, by its universal testing design, is supposed to seek out and find the outliers. And tbh, I think it does find nearly all of them, but there aren't that many.

Methinks you're protesting too much.

Not protesting. Just calling out the BS that wealthy people are wealthy just bc of intelligence and/or "hard work." Again my kids are in AAP. But I acknowledge my and my kids' privilege. The ones who fail to acknowledge this and think that their kids are so special and gifted are the ones usually protesting when they get called on their BS.

Let's call out some more BS. I mean, how do you think reasonably intelligent people become wealthy? By not squandering opportunities, that's how. My immigrant grandparents were poor. DH 's great GP had to flee their country. The number 1 reason dividing the haves and have nots in my family are the ones who had carelessly had children while in HS or shortly thereafter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^I am speaking from personal experience. It wasn’t an advanced class but a class only offered at the school virtually. It was a simple “Sorry, it’s filled.” They gave my kid two other completely unrelated options that would fit in his schedule. It’s about what fits in, not what you want at that point. We certainly weren’t demanding a class spot and bus transportation. Lesson learned, we are already researching other virtual options outside of FCPS for next year.

I firmly think they need to stop the transportation for AAP centers and one of mine went through AAP but stayed at the base school. There are so many other things to spend the money on.

No way they’re going to do this. It’s an equity issue. You’d basically be excluding all the kids whose parents don’t have the resources to drive them every day.

Okay. But there are centers that have every school with a Local Level 4. For example, every school that sends to Westbriar has a Local Level 4. Why should we be bussing kids when they can get a Level 4 class at their own school?

The argument is that the Center schools allow for more classrooms so that the kids can be mixed up every year, just like the Gen Ed classes are shuffled every year. It is better for socialization for kids to have a larger cohort of kids and gives room to keep kids who clash apart.

I think the solution is that you have Advanced Math and Advanced LA in every school. Maybe it is Advanced Math and Science and Advanced LA and Social Studies since there are overlapping skill sets in the classes. Allow kids to move classes based on their areas of strength. Since many schoolshave 3 or more classrooms for each grade, you should be able to keep classes balanced in size and skill set. It would allow more kids to be challenged in their areas of strength. For even larger schools you would end up with 2 advanced classrooms for each of the areas.

The fluidity would be good for all kids and you wouldn’t have to worry about the cohort issues. You could also adjust the kids in each group annually so that kids who start to advance later in ES. It would also allow kids who were on the cusp and are struggling to be moved back into a group that works for them. You also remove the designation and hence the competitive aspect of LIV, that is ridiculous. LIII goes away, since there is Advanced LA, which allows the AART to do more with the LII type kids in K-2 and to provide support for the truly gifted kids who need more then Advanced Math or LA provides.

And you get rid of the Centers and busses and relieve over crowding at some of the Center schools.

+100
I've been wishing they would do something like this for years.
DP

This was how my podunk ES did it in the 80's in of those open concept schools. And by golly it worked.

Yep. Flexible groupings for all is the best way to make this work. Move up when you’re ready, move down if it’s not working out. No drama, no segregation of kids.