Eliminating AAP Centers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Arguing that AAP should be scrapped because of cost creates an unnecessary sideshow. The cost is minimal as FCPS would still have to educate these kids and provide buses for a large chunk of the kids anyway. I think the lack of real differentiation in the Gen Ed classroom is a better argument. I think differentiation should be across the grade instead of every teacher being expected to teach to at least 3 levels within each class. For example, if there are 3 classes in a grade, the teachers could group their kids in a high, middle and low group for language arts and for math, and one teacher would take the high, low or middle group from all the classes. The groups could be reassessed every couple of months. Some schools do this and I think this type of differentiation is easier to accomplish and more efficient than expecting one teacher to do it all. If this was being done,a lot of the parents who send their kids to AAP centers wouldn't feel it was necessary, which would decrease the number of center kids and the brain drain (real or perceived) from Gen Ed. My kids' center is way less convenient than our base school, and I most certainly would have kept them in our base school if it had across the grade differentiation. The in class differentiation was very spotty and inconsistent from teacher to teacher so we opted for the center to avoid the inconsistencies in differentiation at our base school. I'm sure that is a major factor in a lot of parents deciding to send their kids to centers.

I have seen this done very successfully and that it should be the standard practice of all FCPS elementary schools. The teachers also have a better sense of what their team members are teaching and build relationships with students other than the ones in their homerooms. Also the kids mix around more so are exposed to different teachers, classmates and material all year.

It sounds liek there are no problems, which isn't true, but it's a giant leap forward from what many schools are doing now for individual students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eliminate AAP

Agree completely.

I agree. I was considered 'weird' because my kid was accepted and I turned it down. He's interesting, interested and happy. All good here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have gone to schools all over the country and the AAP centers are something which fcps definitely is doing right. It is an excellent program and really is one of the best GT programs we have experienced out of four different states.

+1

Wish we had them in Massachusetts.

Yet MA is one of the states that will be dumbed-down by the new common core standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arguing that AAP should be scrapped because of cost creates an unnecessary sideshow. The cost is minimal as FCPS would still have to educate these kids and provide buses for a large chunk of the kids anyway. I think the lack of real differentiation in the Gen Ed classroom is a better argument. I think differentiation should be across the grade instead of every teacher being expected to teach to at least 3 levels within each class. For example, if there are 3 classes in a grade, the teachers could group their kids in a high, middle and low group for language arts and for math, and one teacher would take the high, low or middle group from all the classes. The groups could be reassessed every couple of months. Some schools do this and I think this type of differentiation is easier to accomplish and more efficient than expecting one teacher to do it all. If this was being done,a lot of the parents who send their kids to AAP centers wouldn't feel it was necessary, which would decrease the number of center kids and the brain drain (real or perceived) from Gen Ed. My kids' center is way less convenient than our base school, and I most certainly would have kept them in our base school if it had across the grade differentiation. The in class differentiation was very spotty and inconsistent from teacher to teacher so we opted for the center to avoid the inconsistencies in differentiation at our base school. I'm sure that is a major factor in a lot of parents deciding to send their kids to centers.

Totally agree!! Our principal eliminated grouping or having teachers "specialize" in one subject (i.e one teaches all of the math or language arts classes), so the homeroom teacher teaches every subject (except specials) and every student in her/his class. She thought that splitting into ability groups was "tracking" to too discouraging for the kids on the lower groups. It has been a disaster.

I was totally surprised that my fourth grader had the same teacher for all subjects. It's been a bit of a disaster because she is a new teacher being asked to teach all subjects, which can be challenging beyond lower elementary. I think by fourth grade specializing should be required.

[Anonymous]

Not to mention boring. The school day is long (longer for some than others---my own kid feels it lasts an eternity), at least get the kids moving between classes and have teachers teaching subjects their really good at (and hopefully better). The one classroom teacher all day is not a good idea for anyone.

[Anonymous]

The one classroom teacher all day is not a good idea for anyone.
[Report Post]

strongly disagree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The one classroom teacher all day is not a good idea for anyone.
[Report Post]

strongly disagree

Please explain.

[Anonymous]

I teach fourth grade and teach two subjects. I prefer this over teaching all subjects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As the previous poster pointed out, they ALL end up together in high school.

I agree. Everyone ends up with a high school diploma anyway, so we should just have a single program. Eliminate all the options and just do one well. Too much superfluous fluff.

Use the example of zero-based budgeting. What are the requirements for a high school diploma? Then work backwards to deliver those items well.

We do not need band, strings, chorus, arts programs.

We simply need math, science, English, and history.

All foreign/world language instruction can be done online. Eliminate all immersion, FLES, FLEX.

Make sure the personal finance course requirement is met.

That's it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the previous poster pointed out, they ALL end up together in high school.

I agree. Everyone ends up with a high school diploma anyway, so we should just have a single program. Eliminate all the options and just do one well. Too much superfluous fluff.

Use the example of zero-based budgeting. What are the requirements for a high school diploma? Then work backwards to deliver those items well.

We do not need band, strings, chorus, arts programs.

We simply need math, science, English, and history.

All foreign/world language instruction can be done online. Eliminate all immersion, FLES, FLEX.

Make sure the personal finance course requirement is met.

That's it.

Are you ready for your house value to drop precipitously?

[Anonymous]

Are you ready for your house value to drop precipitously?

Is that what this is about?

[Anonymous]

No, elim of aap centers will not happen until you see a change in gen ed. today there is too much of a wide range of ability in gen ed, it isn't fair to anyone in those classes aap is only the top kids, and they have a great deal, i know. get gen ed to be more like app - differnetiated classes - and you would see app cntrs elim, but not until then

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eliminate AAP

Agree completely.

I agree. I was considered 'weird' because my kid was accepted and I turned it down. He's interesting, interested and happy. All good here.

Same here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The resources and money thrown at AAP centers would be better utilized improving the academics for all classrooms. As the previous poster pointed out, they ALL end up together in high school. In the end there is no substantial difference, certainly not enough to warrant the amount spent on centers, the bussing, the testing, especially drafting a special test JUST for Fairfax County.

Truly gifted children with outstanding IQs should be given special instruction in their base school, similar to other children with special needs. Advanced Academics for such a large percentage of students is a waste. The majority are not geniuses that NEED specialized instruction.

The fact is that so many kids in FCPS are smart enough for advanced academics, they had to change the guidelines that are used nationwide to determine eligibility.

Since so many kids are able, why not just implement the instruction across the board? This would improve the entire school system rather than just certain parts. The AAP curriculum is not rocket science. It can be used in Gen Ed and I bet most kids would get along just fine.

BUT, this will never happen because the voice of the Pro-AAP side is much louder and vocal.

Absolutely agree with you, on all points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The resources and money thrown at AAP centers would be better utilized improving the academics for all classrooms. As the previous poster pointed out, they ALL end up together in high school. In the end there is no substantial difference, certainly not enough to warrant the amount spent on centers, the bussing, the testing, especially drafting a special test JUST for Fairfax County.

Truly gifted children with outstanding IQs should be given special instruction in their base school, similar to other children with special needs. Advanced Academics for such a large percentage of students is a waste. The majority are not geniuses that NEED specialized instruction.

The fact is that so many kids in FCPS are smart enough for advanced academics, they had to change the guidelines that are used nationwide to determine eligibility.

Since so many kids are able, why not just implement the instruction across the board? This would improve the entire school system rather than just certain parts. The AAP curriculum is not rocket science. It can be used in Gen Ed and I bet most kids would get along just fine.

BUT, this will never happen because the voice of the Pro-AAP side is much louder and vocal.

This seems so logical. What is the counter argument that prevents this?
BTW, our base school is a whopping 40% AAP (2 of 5 classrooms), but that's a subject of a different thread.

I hear you. Our school has 4 AAP classes and 2 Gen Ed. What's wrong with this picture??