Should AAP demographics represent FCPS as a whole

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.

Everyone in America most certainly does not start at the same starting line. Babies are born to families with all sorts of advantages and disadvantages. A child born to parents that are educated and emphasize education to their children is standing at a starting line that is miles ahead of the child born to parents without a college education and that child is miles ahead of the child born to parents in deep poverty or with mental health issues. Is the child born to educated parents somehow more valuable and more worthy of a challenging education because of an accident of birth?

Public education can never totally compensate for deficits in every child's family situation, but I believe it should provide opportunities and do its best to enable all kids to reach their potential.

Right. So we should lower standards so that kids from "disadvantaged" backgrounds could compete? Wouldn't this approach be a disservice to these kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.

I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.

Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.

b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.

Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.

So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?

How smart does one have to be in order to learn grade extensions that are only one level above?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.

I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.

Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.

b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.

Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.

So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?

How smart does one have to be in order to learn grade extensions that are only one level above?

Learning only one grade level above doesn't sound like a gifted program to me. What is all of the excitement about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.

I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.

Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.

b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.

Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.

So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?

How smart does one have to be in order to learn grade extensions that are only one level above?

Learning only one grade level above doesn't sound like a gifted program to me. What is all of the excitement about?

+1.
It's not a gifted program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.

Everyone in America most certainly does not start at the same starting line. Babies are born to families with all sorts of advantages and disadvantages. A child born to parents that are educated and emphasize education to their children is standing at a starting line that is miles ahead of the child born to parents without a college education and that child is miles ahead of the child born to parents in deep poverty or with mental health issues. Is the child born to educated parents somehow more valuable and more worthy of a challenging education because of an accident of birth?

Public education can never totally compensate for deficits in every child's family situation, but I believe it should provide opportunities and do its best to enable all kids to reach their potential.

Right. So we should lower standards so that kids from "disadvantaged" backgrounds could compete? Wouldn't this approach be a disservice to these kids?

We are talking about elementary school here. We need to work with all kids to provide the best education possible. Standardized test scores don't necessarily provide an objective standard, so no need to worry about lowering standards. We can use a variety of methods to identify kids who need advanced or more challenging class work.

Our society can only benefit from providing the best possible education to all kids, even kids who weren't given the lucky lottery ticket in terms of the families they happened to be born to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.

I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.

Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.

b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.

Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.

So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?

How smart does one have to be in order to learn grade extensions that are only one level above?

Learning only one grade level above doesn't sound like a gifted program to me. What is all of the excitement about?

+1.
It's not a gifted program.

What? Not a gifted program! Then why are some of these AAP parents going Ape Crazy about a program that arguably many kids within "all demographics" can be successful in? Maybe because they have invested so much time, money, blood, sweat and tears into getting their DC into this program only to find out that it isn't what they thought is was going to be...most AAP kids will be tracked to AP or IB classes right along with the other GE kids by the time they are in HS. The only advantage AAP gives some kids is in Math (Algebra 1 Honors in the 7th grade); otherwise, they can take the exact same classes in HS...right?

[Anonymous]

What? Not a gifted program! Then why are some of these AAP parents going Ape Crazy about a program that arguably many kids within "all demographics" can be successful in? Maybe because they have invested so much time, money, blood, sweat and tears into getting their DC into this program only to find out that it isn't what they thought is was going to be...most AAP kids will be tracked to AP or IB classes right along with the other GE kids by the time they are in HS. The only advantage AAP gives some kids is in Math (Algebra 1 Honors in the 7th grade); otherwise, they can take the exact same classes in HS...right?

This thread became low comedy pages ago. Having driven everyone else off, the usual cast of haters now has taken to cringe-worthy simulated debate.

It was not much of a topic to begin with, but anyone who really wishes to discuss AAP demographics needs to start a new thread. This one is no longer fit for consumption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What? Not a gifted program! Then why are some of these AAP parents going Ape Crazy about a program that arguably many kids within "all demographics" can be successful in? Maybe because they have invested so much time, money, blood, sweat and tears into getting their DC into this program only to find out that it isn't what they thought is was going to be...most AAP kids will be tracked to AP or IB classes right along with the other GE kids by the time they are in HS. The only advantage AAP gives some kids is in Math (Algebra 1 Honors in the 7th grade); otherwise, they can take the exact same classes in HS...right?

This thread became low comedy pages ago. Having driven everyone else off, the usual cast of haters now has taken to cringe-worthy simulated debate.

It was not much of a topic to begin with, but anyone who really wishes to discuss AAP demographics needs to start a new thread. This one is no longer fit for consumption.

if you don't like it, why don't you start it

[Anonymous]

Blah blah blah blah blah
It is not a Gifted program because my 1st grader couldn't take Mandarin 7 as it conflicted with Matrix Algebra
Blah blah blah blah blah
AP needs to start in Kindergarten so my snowflake could take AP World History and make room for electives in 2nd grade
Blah blah blah blah blah
When can my 1st grader submit the Common App for MIT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Blah blah blah blah blah
It is not a Gifted program because my 1st grader couldn't take Mandarin 7 as it conflicted with Matrix Algebra
Blah blah blah blah blah
AP needs to start in Kindergarten so my snowflake could take AP World History and make room for electives in 2nd grade
Blah blah blah blah blah
When can my 1st grader submit the Common App for MIT?

Isn't it the truth! People on here get crazier and crazier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way AAP is currently being implemented (through grade level extensions) probably underserving many gifted kids...and many kids that can do the work but don't get in are being underserved by GE...I would like to know the reasons why some AAP parents are against AAP for all.

Easy. Kids with best test scores = most qualified. Just so happens that most kids who test well are white and asian. If minority kids can't cut it, then they just can't. They need to work harder to make the cut.

We all take the same tests, and are taught the same material. We all start at the same starting line. The argument of "societal disadvantages" is nebulous at best and unsolvable.

Maybe reading isn't your strength...but you didn't answer the original question...Why are you "against" AAP for all?

Its a ridiculous question. AAP is for all. There are no rules that purposely restrict certain people.

And you are being purposely obtuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.

Everyone in America most certainly does not start at the same starting line. Babies are born to families with all sorts of advantages and disadvantages. A child born to parents that are educated and emphasize education to their children is standing at a starting line that is miles ahead of the child born to parents without a college education and that child is miles ahead of the child born to parents in deep poverty or with mental health issues. Is the child born to educated parents somehow more valuable and more worthy of a challenging education because of an accident of birth?

Public education can never totally compensate for deficits in every child's family situation, but I believe it should provide opportunities and do its best to enable all kids to reach their potential.

Right. So we should lower standards so that kids from "disadvantaged" backgrounds could compete? Wouldn't this approach be a disservice to these kids?

Not the PP, but we're talking about an advanced academic program - that's it. Why should kids be competing at all, simply to take advanced course work? They don't have to jump through these hoops at the high school level. Students simply choose whichever level best suits their abilities and/or their work ethic. No one has to test into AP or IB classes. Why should elementary aged kids have to test into an advanced curriculum? Why not simply make it available to all, along with the regular curriculum? I'm not seeing the problem here. It's not an issue at the high school level, and should not be an issue in elementary and middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.

I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.

Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.

b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.

Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.

So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?

How smart does one have to be in order to learn grade extensions that are only one level above?

Ha - PRECISELY!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.

I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.

Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.

b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.

Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.

So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?

How smart does one have to be in order to learn grade extensions that are only one level above?

Learning only one grade level above doesn't sound like a gifted program to me. What is all of the excitement about?

+1.
It's not a gifted program.

What? Not a gifted program! Then why are some of these AAP parents going Ape Crazy about a program that arguably many kids within "all demographics" can be successful in? Maybe because they have invested so much time, money, blood, sweat and tears into getting their DC into this program only to find out that it isn't what they thought is was going to be...most AAP kids will be tracked to AP or IB classes right along with the other GE kids by the time they are in HS. The only advantage AAP gives some kids is in Math (Algebra 1 Honors in the 7th grade); otherwise, they can take the exact same classes in HS...right?

Ding, ding, ding - you are correct! This is how all the kids wind up, side by side in the same honors and AP/IB classes in high school, regardless of who was previously in AAP or not. So why is it a closed program from 3-8th grade in the first place? It's completely nonsensical.

[Anonymous]

And, again, I ask why not have 3 tracks available in 3rd onward: Gen Ed, Honors (parent referrals) and AAP (for those who qualify). Why is this not status quot? Because, the lowest performers will be in GE, and the schools want to boost the lowest common denominator at the cost of the those who would fare well in honors (if not admitted into AAP).

SO, again, the hard-working kid who would benefit from honors in 3rd grade, is held back to benefit a few at the bottom. Until honors is opened in 3rd grade, parents of motivated kids will continue to fight and appeal to get the best education for their offspring.