AAP should be eliminated as it’s not the path to equity

[Anonymous]

A child's education is first supported by their family, and then by the school. A parent is child's first teacher. Parent can break or make a child by being a bad role model, ignorant role model, or a good role model. An uninformed and ignorant parent expects the school to pick up their parenting responsibility, when at school their child at best can practically get just 1/20th of the class teacher's attention, and could get 100% of parent's productive attention outside school.

On this forum, a responsible parent is foolishly referenced as a wealthy parent, and a hardworking student is depicted as a prepped student. An ignorant parent eats up this narrative fast because it doesn't highlight their remiss in their parental duty, and conveniently blames the lack of progress in their child's education as a problem caused by school and other parents.

Exactly this.

The other thing is that a lot of the parents who think their smart, are really just hardworking and lucky.

Their kids may not get into AAP but the fact that they can grow up to be hardworking and successful doesn’t seem to be important here. Their kids will still get a great education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is AAP created for equity? I don't think so.

Should AAP consider equity? Absolutely.

Should AAP be eliminated because it is not equitable? Absolutely not.

Using AAP as some kind of equity measurement is preposterous and ignores the blatant fact that the teachers can only do so much.

The teacher can’t solve hunger at home or violence or negligence. The teacher cannot solve that. The schools can’t solve that.

But a child tax credit can.

All of this is moot though as housing is ridiculous and the end result of a lot of rich people in this county and fewer poor people n

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
A child's education is first supported by their family, and then by the school. A parent is child's first teacher. Parent can break or make a child by being a bad role model, ignorant role model, or a good role model. An uninformed and ignorant parent expects the school to pick up their parenting responsibility, when at school their child at best can practically get just 1/20th of the class teacher's attention, and could get 100% of parent's productive attention outside school.

On this forum, a responsible parent is foolishly referenced as a wealthy parent, and a hardworking student is depicted as a prepped student. An ignorant parent eats up this narrative fast because it doesn't highlight their remiss in their parental duty, and conveniently blames the lack of progress in their child's education as a problem caused by school and other parents.

Why doesn't FCPS have the courage to address the lack of parental responsibility as the central issue here? While it might incur some political costs, ignoring the godzilla issue of lack of parental involvement and responsibility is not a viable long-term solution.

Has FCPS ever had parent training for successful child education?

[Anonymous]

https://www.aecf.org/blog/parental-involvement-is-key-to-student-success-research-shows

"Stu­dents whose par­ents stay involved in school have bet­ter atten­dance and behav­ior, get bet­ter grades, demon­strate bet­ter social skills and adapt bet­ter to school.

How Can Par­ents Get Involved in Their Child’s Education?

Make learn­ing a pri­or­i­ty in your home, estab­lish­ing rou­tines and sched­ules that enable chil­dren to com­plete home­work, read inde­pen­dent­ly, get enough sleep and have oppor­tu­ni­ties to get help from you. Talk about what’s going on in school.
Read to and with your chil­dren: Even 10–20 min­utes dai­ly makes a dif­fer­ence. And par­ents can go fur­ther by ensur­ing that they read more each day as well, either as a fam­i­ly or pri­vate read­ing time that sets a good example.
Use your com­mute to con­nect with your kids; ask them to read to you while you dri­ve and encour­age con­ver­sa­tions about school. "

[Anonymous]

There is no quota for AAP. This entire discussion makes no sense. Anyone can get in. It shouldn’t be used as a measure of equity. It’s not a requirement for all kids tho meet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A child's education is first supported by their family, and then by the school. A parent is child's first teacher. Parent can break or make a child by being a bad role model, ignorant role model, or a good role model. An uninformed and ignorant parent expects the school to pick up their parenting responsibility, when at school their child at best can practically get just 1/20th of the class teacher's attention, and could get 100% of parent's productive attention outside school.

On this forum, a responsible parent is foolishly referenced as a wealthy parent, and a hardworking student is depicted as a prepped student. An ignorant parent eats up this narrative fast because it doesn't highlight their remiss in their parental duty, and conveniently blames the lack of progress in their child's education as a problem caused by school and other parents.

Why doesn't FCPS have the courage to address the lack of parental responsibility as the central issue here? While it might incur some political costs, ignoring the godzilla issue of lack of parental involvement and responsibility is not a viable long-term solution.

Has FCPS ever had parent training for successful child education?

What does FCPS do about parents who don’t get their kids to school or to do their school work? You are mainly talking about poor families where the parents are working multiple jobs so they might not be in a place to make sure their kid goes to school. And parents who don’t have an education themselves so they probably can’t help with homework or understand what their kid is doing in school.

I know some schools send home books in K and First grade for parents to read to kids. They are Bob level books that are meant to try and help the parents with reading as well as the kids. I had a friend at a Title 1 school who showed me the books. They were saving them for their younger child when he was in preschool.

How do you get the parents who are working a ton to the school to teach them what they need to help their kids? Most of the low SES families don’t have a GED, never mind a high school diploma. There are services to help people earn their GED but those are not utilized.

It has nothing to do with intelligence. Families are not in that boat because they are dumb, they are there because there have been generations of families that did not value education and that is passed on to their kids. How hard do you think it is for a kid whose parents don’t read, don’t have a degree, and don’t have an interest in school to take their own schooling seriously? Who do they turn to for help when they need it and they are not at school?

Families who are coming from countries were the government has broken down and schools are non-existent have no chance to start getting an education in their country. Their kids had no chance to get an education in their home country. They come to the US and the parents need to find jobs. If they are here illegally, then they are going to be careful about asking for help because they don’t want to be deported. They are working jobs that probably pay under a working wage because they employer can get away with that. Their kids might attend school. If they do they are placed in a class based on their age. Placing a non-English speaking kid who has probably been traumatized in their home country into an English speaking classroom with kids who have at least been in school since K and some who have parents who are supplementing at home is not going to meet their needs.

It has nothing to do with intelligence, it has everything to do with circumstances that the kids and the schools have no control over. We are asking schools to find a way to solve long standing societal issues, which is ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asians are the majority of the high academic groups in FCPS. Why do we keep talking about whites?

Because half of whites blame the other half for all social problems, to gain political and financial advantage. Bringing the Asians into this discussion distracts the political narrative. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's a great story about an equitable society: https://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html

Funny how what started as sci-fi becomes real life, especially when we let ourselves be ever so slowly boiled in the DEI crap. First, it seems that you'd have to be a jerk not to agree with their principles, and then they turn from focusing the equal opportunity ideal to striving for equal outcomes and US education is DONE. Too many variables to control. It's just not reality since we're not all produced in a factory with QC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I found this article so moving:

https://tcf.org/content/commentary/gifted-talented-programs-not-path-equity/

And the arguments made are so compelling.

Don’t you agree this also applies to the AAP program? Should we find ways to phase it out, and offer the same opportunities to every learner in FCPS ?

Yes, especially since the current incarnation of AAP is just segregation for those with means.

Try again. Without AAP, our school would be very white and homogenous.

My white kid was in an AAP class at his local elementary, and he was a minority. There were just a few white kids in the class.

Same

While it is technically true that you can be a White minority when surrounded by a majority of Indian and Korean AAP classmates, it is also misleading to claim that AAP is diverse because of that.

If your criterion for diversity is race-based, surely white vs Indian vs Korean counts. Perhaps it would be fairer to just base on objective measures like ability score, but there doesn't seem to be the will to do things that way as we've gone too far down the URM road.

I attended a very prestigious college back when AA was new. All the Blacks and Latinos were coveted applicants and got special perks/offers to attend like winter clothes allowances in addition to full scholarships. The thing is some of these kids, whom I was friendly with, were poor and underprivileged like ghetto kids or just a generation beyond migrants in rural areas of CA. Others were coming from fancy boarding schools; but the university got to check off an AA box for them all the same. Still seems a bit off to me in the same way that basing AAP admissions on factors like race does today.

[Anonymous]

So many of you on here patting yourselves on the back. Sure, only irresponsible parents don’t game the system (if you’re not cheating you’re not trying, right?). Only irresponsible parents expect the schools to actually educate their children. And any students who for whatever reason didn’t make the cut for AAP when they’re 7-8 years old are definitely going to get a fabulous education in those schools that the AAP kids are too good to even have to set foot in again. Right.

No one would have a problem with AAP if it was truly a program for the gifted. Lots of people have a problem with it because it’s a program for the upper middle class/wealthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many of you on here patting yourselves on the back. Sure, only irresponsible parents don’t game the system (if you’re not cheating you’re not trying, right?). Only irresponsible parents expect the schools to actually educate their children. And any students who for whatever reason didn’t make the cut for AAP when they’re 7-8 years old are definitely going to get a fabulous education in those schools that the AAP kids are too good to even have to set foot in again. Right.

No one would have a problem with AAP if it was truly a program for the gifted. Lots of people have a problem with it because it’s a program for the upper middle class/wealthy.

That's the point. It's not.

But carry on with your "I'm not bitter."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many of you on here patting yourselves on the back. Sure, only irresponsible parents don’t game the system (if you’re not cheating you’re not trying, right?). Only irresponsible parents expect the schools to actually educate their children. And any students who for whatever reason didn’t make the cut for AAP when they’re 7-8 years old are definitely going to get a fabulous education in those schools that the AAP kids are too good to even have to set foot in again. Right.

No one would have a problem with AAP if it was truly a program for the gifted. Lots of people have a problem with it because it’s a program for the upper middle class/wealthy.

Which is why I think it should be the top 10-15% of the kids at each ES. But then the other classes need to have some types of differentiation as well so that we don’t end up with kids in the other classrooms who are behind with kids who are on grade level with kids who are a bit ahead. The kids who are below grade level should be in smaller classes that make it easier for Teachers to focus on their needs. Or they should allow the kids to rotate Teachers so that kids are in appropriate groupings for each class. But we need a place for the kids who are ahead to go and learn as well as the kids who are behind.

I am fine with getting rid of the Centers. I don’t see the need for them but we deferred services rather then send DS to the Center. We did not like the social vibe at the Center and DS wanted to continue in his language immersion program anyway. He has had Advanced math every year and enjoys the LIII class. It has worked for us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many of you on here patting yourselves on the back. Sure, only irresponsible parents don’t game the system (if you’re not cheating you’re not trying, right?). Only irresponsible parents expect the schools to actually educate their children. And any students who for whatever reason didn’t make the cut for AAP when they’re 7-8 years old are definitely going to get a fabulous education in those schools that the AAP kids are too good to even have to set foot in again. Right.

No one would have a problem with AAP if it was truly a program for the gifted. Lots of people have a problem with it because it’s a program for the upper middle class/wealthy.

Which is why I think it should be the top 10-15% of the kids at each ES. But then the other classes need to have some types of differentiation as well so that we don’t end up with kids in the other classrooms who are behind with kids who are on grade level with kids who are a bit ahead. The kids who are below grade level should be in smaller classes that make it easier for Teachers to focus on their needs. Or they should allow the kids to rotate Teachers so that kids are in appropriate groupings for each class. But we need a place for the kids who are ahead to go and learn as well as the kids who are behind.

I am fine with getting rid of the Centers. I don’t see the need for them but we deferred services rather then send DS to the Center. We did not like the social vibe at the Center and DS wanted to continue in his language immersion program anyway. He has had Advanced math every year and enjoys the LIII class. It has worked for us.

Lol

And all those kids who needed the social aspect of the center school (one of my two, for example), you don't care about them because you don't have experience with it. Broaden your perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's another angle to this that gets missed a lot. One of the big complaints to any form of specialized opportunities for "advanced" kids (honors/advanced classes, AAP, G&T, anything) is that you end up a cohort of kids in the advanced track who are richer and whiter and so it's seen as a form of segregation. I think this is a reasonable concern. Segregation in housing and in educational opportunities is a huge problem in the US, and has been an ongoing problem since before Civil Rights. This is something we need to try to address.

But simplistic ideas like getting rid of AAP are missing the bigger picture. Yes, you can segregate kids within a school, and that's not good. But what's worse than that is to segregate kids into different schools. And what's worse than that is to segregate kids into completely different communities.

If a diverse school in a diverse community offers an advanced option that is somewhat segregated, and then they simply remove that advanced option to avoid segregation in the name of equity, some of the parents whose kids were or would be in the advanced option may choose a different school if they have that option. They may move into a neighborhood where the gen ed educational path has more rigor, if they can afford it. Those schools and neighborhoods are likely to be richer and whiter, exacerbating the problem.

Removing an AAP program that's 75% white from a school that's 75% students of color, but then causing most of those white kids (over time) to decamp to adjacent mostly white school districts, INCREASES segregation. No, you won't have the visual anymore of gen ed classes filled with students of color and the AAP classes filled with white kids. But those kids will be even more segregated, going to completely different schools and living in completely different neighborhoods.

So to me, the better option is to dig deeper into causes of inequality and try to address them. If there's a test for admission, don't allow families with resources to retake or try another option or talk their kids into the program. But maybe, allow at risk kids whose scores are slightly below the cutoff to join the advanced track. Provide high-quality early education programs. Make sure that special needs are addressed for all kids. These kinds of changes are much more expensive and complex than "end AAP because of segregation" but they're a better path to equity in the long run.

Not just better- the only path that makes sense.

It’s also important to note- people will move without AAP. Young families can’t afford this area to begin with. Without AAP to attract the young wealthy families- people will just move to Loudoun, WV or RVA.

No parent obsessed with school performance is moving to WV. That is not happening.

We need to shift what we think of as an equitable outcome, it isn’t that every kid is able to take AP classes and get a 5. That is never going to happen because there are different abilities and that is fine.

What we are talking about is kids ability to access an education that will allow them to succeed, graduate with solid skills, and go to college or get a job. The truth is that the education gap exists because some parents read to their kids, do math with their kids, and have higher educational expectations for their kids. Some families don’t do these things or have these goals.

There are families of generational poor people. No one in the family has graduated from high school. It isn’t important to the family. The parents don’t worry about their kids attending. They are not reading to their kids. They are not supplementing math. Why would they? Their parents didn’t do those things for them. Their grandparents didn’t do it for their parents. And back it goes.

Most of the families that immigrate to the US for low wage jobs are coming from places where school is not a priority. Their communities don’t have strong schools. Attendance is not important. School really is not a thing there. Their kids come with the parents to the US with limited to no education. The parents have limited to no education. And we expect those kids and parents to embrace regular attendance, homework, and graduation?

Some families are coming to the US from cultures that strongly value education that is not as available to their kids. Maybe it is where they live in the country or the where they fit in society but they cannot access the schools that they want. They come to the US to give their kids those opportunities and improve their lives. Those are the parents who are busting their butts to get their kids into school and programs like AAP. They value education in a way that most native born Americans don’t.

Everything we are talking about here does nothing to help the first two groups of poor kids. And the reality is that what we do is not likely to have a huge effect on those kids because their parents don’t care. Short of making school year round and 10 hours a day so that those kids are at school, surrounded by Teachers and Admin that value education most of their day, we are not going to reach them. The inclusive classrooms and attempts like it are about optics. We don’t want to admit that there are groups of kids that we cannot reach.

This is spot on. This is why the poorest performing schools have $$$$ thrown at them with little change.

[Anonymous]

So you get rid of AAP, then what is a teacher to do with a class of 30 kids with widely ranging skill levels and aptitudes? I'd like to hear from teachers about this not overly-opinionated parents who despise AAP because they actually don't care that much about their kids education and resent that others do and get something for it.