Level IV clustering

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

Agree that the AAP report was surprising and I found the test scores to be surprisingly far below the "old" cutoffs. Clustering makes sense, in that light, when coupled with center schools for kids nearer to or above the cutoffs.

Yeah. The big problem is that the overwhelming majority of AAP kids are only slightly advanced and somewhat above average, yet the parents of those kids are the ones fighting tooth and nail against clustering and LLIV. They're convinced that their somewhat above average kids simply can't have their needs met among the unwashed masses, and that their kids are somehow better than or more worthy than the LIII kids from whom they are indistinguishable.

The issue in our cluster school has nothing to do with level III kids. I would be happy to see my kid in a separate class with a combination of Level III and Level IV students. My issue is that our local program only provides Level IV material (beyond the math component) three days a week--sometimes two, depending on the AART's availability.

A lot of people do not feel this way. There have been numerous threads and comments in this forum about how the parents don't want their kid in a standard LLIV classroom, because they want their kid only with centrally placed LIV kids and not any principal placed LLIV kids.

I haven't seen any comments in this thread like that- what I have seen is some parents saying they don't like the LLIV cluster model. Some schools may cluster by filling a class out with LIII kids, but some just fill out classes with everyone.

Our ES told us they were looking at a model where they would split the LIV kids across all classes in the grade, and the other LIV kids in their class would learn LIV content as a cluster. I asked how many LIV kids per grade they usually had, and the answer was 6. Six kids split across 5 classes, and the rest not filled in w LIII, just with everyone.

We're not arrogant enough to think that the poor teacher is going to spend a lot of time teaching our solo kid a separate curriculum when she has 24 other kids to teach. We want our kid with a cohort that will give the teacher the ability to teach faster and more in depth. That could be all LIV kids, or a mix of LIII and LIV, but it's really not in the totally heterogeneous classroom

Our school is doing clustering by teaching the AAP curriculum to everyone and offering advanced ways to answer the questions to the more advanced kids. So whereas the General Ed, LII and III kids might answer an essay question with a paragraph, the LLIV kids can go deeper, do additional research, and write an essay. If they are doing a group project, the teachers will group the LLIV kids together so they can do a more complex answer. They also switch kids for math which has the added benefit of getting them ready to switch classes in middle school -- I heard this is one critique that middle schools have of LLIV programs that kids are together with the same cohort of 20-25 people for three years and then really struggle when they hit middle school with different kids in every class.

Please. That sounds like a sales pitch, not an actual classroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

Agree that the AAP report was surprising and I found the test scores to be surprisingly far below the "old" cutoffs. Clustering makes sense, in that light, when coupled with center schools for kids nearer to or above the cutoffs.

Yeah. The big problem is that the overwhelming majority of AAP kids are only slightly advanced and somewhat above average, yet the parents of those kids are the ones fighting tooth and nail against clustering and LLIV. They're convinced that their somewhat above average kids simply can't have their needs met among the unwashed masses, and that their kids are somehow better than or more worthy than the LIII kids from whom they are indistinguishable.

The issue in our cluster school has nothing to do with level III kids. I would be happy to see my kid in a separate class with a combination of Level III and Level IV students. My issue is that our local program only provides Level IV material (beyond the math component) three days a week--sometimes two, depending on the AART's availability.

A lot of people do not feel this way. There have been numerous threads and comments in this forum about how the parents don't want their kid in a standard LLIV classroom, because they want their kid only with centrally placed LIV kids and not any principal placed LLIV kids.

I haven't seen any comments in this thread like that- what I have seen is some parents saying they don't like the LLIV cluster model. Some schools may cluster by filling a class out with LIII kids, but some just fill out classes with everyone.

Our ES told us they were looking at a model where they would split the LIV kids across all classes in the grade, and the other LIV kids in their class would learn LIV content as a cluster. I asked how many LIV kids per grade they usually had, and the answer was 6. Six kids split across 5 classes, and the rest not filled in w LIII, just with everyone.

We're not arrogant enough to think that the poor teacher is going to spend a lot of time teaching our solo kid a separate curriculum when she has 24 other kids to teach. We want our kid with a cohort that will give the teacher the ability to teach faster and more in depth. That could be all LIV kids, or a mix of LIII and LIV, but it's really not in the totally heterogeneous classroom

Our school is doing clustering by teaching the AAP curriculum to everyone and offering advanced ways to answer the questions to the more advanced kids. So whereas the General Ed, LII and III kids might answer an essay question with a paragraph, the LLIV kids can go deeper, do additional research, and write an essay. If they are doing a group project, the teachers will group the LLIV kids together so they can do a more complex answer. They also switch kids for math which has the added benefit of getting them ready to switch classes in middle school -- I heard this is one critique that middle schools have of LLIV programs that kids are together with the same cohort of 20-25 people for three years and then really struggle when they hit middle school with different kids in every class.

Please. That sounds like a sales pitch, not an actual classroom.

I mean, my kid is in a classroom that is operating like this, and it's working.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

Agree that the AAP report was surprising and I found the test scores to be surprisingly far below the "old" cutoffs. Clustering makes sense, in that light, when coupled with center schools for kids nearer to or above the cutoffs.

Yeah. The big problem is that the overwhelming majority of AAP kids are only slightly advanced and somewhat above average, yet the parents of those kids are the ones fighting tooth and nail against clustering and LLIV. They're convinced that their somewhat above average kids simply can't have their needs met among the unwashed masses, and that their kids are somehow better than or more worthy than the LIII kids from whom they are indistinguishable.

The issue in our cluster school has nothing to do with level III kids. I would be happy to see my kid in a separate class with a combination of Level III and Level IV students. My issue is that our local program only provides Level IV material (beyond the math component) three days a week--sometimes two, depending on the AART's availability.

A lot of people do not feel this way. There have been numerous threads and comments in this forum about how the parents don't want their kid in a standard LLIV classroom, because they want their kid only with centrally placed LIV kids and not any principal placed LLIV kids.

I haven't seen any comments in this thread like that- what I have seen is some parents saying they don't like the LLIV cluster model. Some schools may cluster by filling a class out with LIII kids, but some just fill out classes with everyone.

Our ES told us they were looking at a model where they would split the LIV kids across all classes in the grade, and the other LIV kids in their class would learn LIV content as a cluster. I asked how many LIV kids per grade they usually had, and the answer was 6. Six kids split across 5 classes, and the rest not filled in w LIII, just with everyone.

We're not arrogant enough to think that the poor teacher is going to spend a lot of time teaching our solo kid a separate curriculum when she has 24 other kids to teach. We want our kid with a cohort that will give the teacher the ability to teach faster and more in depth. That could be all LIV kids, or a mix of LIII and LIV, but it's really not in the totally heterogeneous classroom

Our school is doing clustering by teaching the AAP curriculum to everyone and offering advanced ways to answer the questions to the more advanced kids. So whereas the General Ed, LII and III kids might answer an essay question with a paragraph, the LLIV kids can go deeper, do additional research, and write an essay. If they are doing a group project, the teachers will group the LLIV kids together so they can do a more complex answer. They also switch kids for math which has the added benefit of getting them ready to switch classes in middle school -- I heard this is one critique that middle schools have of LLIV programs that kids are together with the same cohort of 20-25 people for three years and then really struggle when they hit middle school with different kids in every class.

Please. That sounds like a sales pitch, not an actual classroom.

+1 Doesn't sound like the curriculum is differentiated, just the responses. And if it's too hard for the non-LIV kids, you can bet it will become the gen ed curriculum. LIV math in third grade is supposed to be third and fourth grade combined. Is that being taught to the gen ed kids, because that is one of the most challenging parts of AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

Agree that the AAP report was surprising and I found the test scores to be surprisingly far below the "old" cutoffs. Clustering makes sense, in that light, when coupled with center schools for kids nearer to or above the cutoffs.

Yeah. The big problem is that the overwhelming majority of AAP kids are only slightly advanced and somewhat above average, yet the parents of those kids are the ones fighting tooth and nail against clustering and LLIV. They're convinced that their somewhat above average kids simply can't have their needs met among the unwashed masses, and that their kids are somehow better than or more worthy than the LIII kids from whom they are indistinguishable.

The issue in our cluster school has nothing to do with level III kids. I would be happy to see my kid in a separate class with a combination of Level III and Level IV students. My issue is that our local program only provides Level IV material (beyond the math component) three days a week--sometimes two, depending on the AART's availability.

A lot of people do not feel this way. There have been numerous threads and comments in this forum about how the parents don't want their kid in a standard LLIV classroom, because they want their kid only with centrally placed LIV kids and not any principal placed LLIV kids.

I haven't seen any comments in this thread like that- what I have seen is some parents saying they don't like the LLIV cluster model. Some schools may cluster by filling a class out with LIII kids, but some just fill out classes with everyone.

Our ES told us they were looking at a model where they would split the LIV kids across all classes in the grade, and the other LIV kids in their class would learn LIV content as a cluster. I asked how many LIV kids per grade they usually had, and the answer was 6. Six kids split across 5 classes, and the rest not filled in w LIII, just with everyone.

We're not arrogant enough to think that the poor teacher is going to spend a lot of time teaching our solo kid a separate curriculum when she has 24 other kids to teach. We want our kid with a cohort that will give the teacher the ability to teach faster and more in depth. That could be all LIV kids, or a mix of LIII and LIV, but it's really not in the totally heterogeneous classroom

Our school is doing clustering by teaching the AAP curriculum to everyone and offering advanced ways to answer the questions to the more advanced kids. So whereas the General Ed, LII and III kids might answer an essay question with a paragraph, the LLIV kids can go deeper, do additional research, and write an essay. If they are doing a group project, the teachers will group the LLIV kids together so they can do a more complex answer. They also switch kids for math which has the added benefit of getting them ready to switch classes in middle school -- I heard this is one critique that middle schools have of LLIV programs that kids are together with the same cohort of 20-25 people for three years and then really struggle when they hit middle school with different kids in every class.

Please. That sounds like a sales pitch, not an actual classroom.

I mean, my kid is in a classroom that is operating like this, and it's working.

General Ed student, presuming?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cannot wait until they dismantle the centers.

LOL, not in your lifetime.

If all the schools have Local Level IV, which they’re on track to do within a couple of years, then they absolutely could dismantle them.

Not going to happen, but feel free to hold your breath until you turn blue.

DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cannot wait until they dismantle the centers.

IKR? The reason families with bright children choose Fairfax over alternatives in the DMV - can't wait to get rid of it!

Yup, ALL the families with kids in AAP are going to move away somewhere with a more rigorous curriculum for their children.

Oh wait.

Of course not all. We bought in fairfax specifically for the AAP opportunities though. I would have considered other neighboring districts when we were house hunting if not for AAP.

So go ahead and move to Arlington - literally everyone I know there hates the school system. Prince William County schools are very poorly rated. You could move to Loudon but it's full of crazy people. Have fun!!!

No one needs to move. The centers are staying. Have fun!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The quality of the LLIV experience seems to vary tremendously. I worry that they'll start restricting center access to kids from schools without a LLIV program. Wouldn't be surprised at all to see this happen.

I agree. I bet this will happen. Helps with bus issues too.

Just so long as they grandfather in the kids who are already there. Would be awful for the kids who just adjusted to a new school in 3rd grade to be forced back again only a year or two later.

It's for the greater good and they'll understand.

IKR? Lol

Both of your jealousy is so apparent and so ugly. Do better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A significant number of students are leaving Cub Run's LLIV for the center at Poplar Tree next year, in all grades. Their local level program/clustering has not gone well and parents are speaking with their feet.

Same with Virginia Run. I think parents of LIV children at both schools have a strong preference to send their kids to Rocky Run for middle school too.

Stone MS is rated a 3. Rocky Run is a 9-10. Who wouldn't switch if they could?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

Agree that the AAP report was surprising and I found the test scores to be surprisingly far below the "old" cutoffs. Clustering makes sense, in that light, when coupled with center schools for kids nearer to or above the cutoffs.

Yeah. The big problem is that the overwhelming majority of AAP kids are only slightly advanced and somewhat above average, yet the parents of those kids are the ones fighting tooth and nail against clustering and LLIV. They're convinced that their somewhat above average kids simply can't have their needs met among the unwashed masses, and that their kids are somehow better than or more worthy than the LIII kids from whom they are indistinguishable.

The issue in our cluster school has nothing to do with level III kids. I would be happy to see my kid in a separate class with a combination of Level III and Level IV students. My issue is that our local program only provides Level IV material (beyond the math component) three days a week--sometimes two, depending on the AART's availability.

A lot of people do not feel this way. There have been numerous threads and comments in this forum about how the parents don't want their kid in a standard LLIV classroom, because they want their kid only with centrally placed LIV kids and not any principal placed LLIV kids.

I haven't seen any comments in this thread like that- what I have seen is some parents saying they don't like the LLIV cluster model. Some schools may cluster by filling a class out with LIII kids, but some just fill out classes with everyone.

Our ES told us they were looking at a model where they would split the LIV kids across all classes in the grade, and the other LIV kids in their class would learn LIV content as a cluster. I asked how many LIV kids per grade they usually had, and the answer was 6. Six kids split across 5 classes, and the rest not filled in w LIII, just with everyone.

We're not arrogant enough to think that the poor teacher is going to spend a lot of time teaching our solo kid a separate curriculum when she has 24 other kids to teach. We want our kid with a cohort that will give the teacher the ability to teach faster and more in depth. That could be all LIV kids, or a mix of LIII and LIV, but it's really not in the totally heterogeneous classroom

Our school is doing clustering by teaching the AAP curriculum to everyone and offering advanced ways to answer the questions to the more advanced kids. So whereas the General Ed, LII and III kids might answer an essay question with a paragraph, the LLIV kids can go deeper, do additional research, and write an essay. If they are doing a group project, the teachers will group the LLIV kids together so they can do a more complex answer. They also switch kids for math which has the added benefit of getting them ready to switch classes in middle school -- I heard this is one critique that middle schools have of LLIV programs that kids are together with the same cohort of 20-25 people for three years and then really struggle when they hit middle school with different kids in every class.

Please. That sounds like a sales pitch, not an actual classroom.

I mean, my kid is in a classroom that is operating like this, and it's working.

General Ed student, presuming?

No, LLIV student.

[Anonymous]

New FCPS parent, what is clustering?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New FCPS parent, what is clustering?

Spreading level IV kids throughout classrooms rather than having a single level IV class. Our school has done it for years and it seems like we keep as many LIV kids as we lose to the center every year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New FCPS parent, what is clustering?

Spreading level IV kids throughout classrooms rather than having a single level IV class. Our school has done it for years and it seems like we keep as many LIV kids as we lose to the center every year

It sounds like your school does it well!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

Did you read the post? The Level 4 kids switch into their own classroom for math. This is not an issue.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

Agree that the AAP report was surprising and I found the test scores to be surprisingly far below the "old" cutoffs. Clustering makes sense, in that light, when coupled with center schools for kids nearer to or above the cutoffs.

Yeah. The big problem is that the overwhelming majority of AAP kids are only slightly advanced and somewhat above average, yet the parents of those kids are the ones fighting tooth and nail against clustering and LLIV. They're convinced that their somewhat above average kids simply can't have their needs met among the unwashed masses, and that their kids are somehow better than or more worthy than the LIII kids from whom they are indistinguishable.

The issue in our cluster school has nothing to do with level III kids. I would be happy to see my kid in a separate class with a combination of Level III and Level IV students. My issue is that our local program only provides Level IV material (beyond the math component) three days a week--sometimes two, depending on the AART's availability.

A lot of people do not feel this way. There have been numerous threads and comments in this forum about how the parents don't want their kid in a standard LLIV classroom, because they want their kid only with centrally placed LIV kids and not any principal placed LLIV kids.

I haven't seen any comments in this thread like that- what I have seen is some parents saying they don't like the LLIV cluster model. Some schools may cluster by filling a class out with LIII kids, but some just fill out classes with everyone.

Our ES told us they were looking at a model where they would split the LIV kids across all classes in the grade, and the other LIV kids in their class would learn LIV content as a cluster. I asked how many LIV kids per grade they usually had, and the answer was 6. Six kids split across 5 classes, and the rest not filled in w LIII, just with everyone.

We're not arrogant enough to think that the poor teacher is going to spend a lot of time teaching our solo kid a separate curriculum when she has 24 other kids to teach. We want our kid with a cohort that will give the teacher the ability to teach faster and more in depth. That could be all LIV kids, or a mix of LIII and LIV, but it's really not in the totally heterogeneous classroom

Our school is doing clustering by teaching the AAP curriculum to everyone and offering advanced ways to answer the questions to the more advanced kids. So whereas the General Ed, LII and III kids might answer an essay question with a paragraph, the LLIV kids can go deeper, do additional research, and write an essay. If they are doing a group project, the teachers will group the LLIV kids together so they can do a more complex answer. They also switch kids for math which has the added benefit of getting them ready to switch classes in middle school -- I heard this is one critique that middle schools have of LLIV programs that kids are together with the same cohort of 20-25 people for three years and then really struggle when they hit middle school with different kids in every class.

Please. That sounds like a sales pitch, not an actual classroom.

+1 Doesn't sound like the curriculum is differentiated, just the responses. And if it's too hard for the non-LIV kids, you can bet it will become the gen ed curriculum. LIV math in third grade is supposed to be third and fourth grade combined. Is that being taught to the gen ed kids, because that is one of the most challenging parts of AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

Agree that the AAP report was surprising and I found the test scores to be surprisingly far below the "old" cutoffs. Clustering makes sense, in that light, when coupled with center schools for kids nearer to or above the cutoffs.

Yeah. The big problem is that the overwhelming majority of AAP kids are only slightly advanced and somewhat above average, yet the parents of those kids are the ones fighting tooth and nail against clustering and LLIV. They're convinced that their somewhat above average kids simply can't have their needs met among the unwashed masses, and that their kids are somehow better than or more worthy than the LIII kids from whom they are indistinguishable.

The issue in our cluster school has nothing to do with level III kids. I would be happy to see my kid in a separate class with a combination of Level III and Level IV students. My issue is that our local program only provides Level IV material (beyond the math component) three days a week--sometimes two, depending on the AART's availability.

A lot of people do not feel this way. There have been numerous threads and comments in this forum about how the parents don't want their kid in a standard LLIV classroom, because they want their kid only with centrally placed LIV kids and not any principal placed LLIV kids.

I haven't seen any comments in this thread like that- what I have seen is some parents saying they don't like the LLIV cluster model. Some schools may cluster by filling a class out with LIII kids, but some just fill out classes with everyone.

Our ES told us they were looking at a model where they would split the LIV kids across all classes in the grade, and the other LIV kids in their class would learn LIV content as a cluster. I asked how many LIV kids per grade they usually had, and the answer was 6. Six kids split across 5 classes, and the rest not filled in w LIII, just with everyone.

We're not arrogant enough to think that the poor teacher is going to spend a lot of time teaching our solo kid a separate curriculum when she has 24 other kids to teach. We want our kid with a cohort that will give the teacher the ability to teach faster and more in depth. That could be all LIV kids, or a mix of LIII and LIV, but it's really not in the totally heterogeneous classroom

Our school is doing clustering by teaching the AAP curriculum to everyone and offering advanced ways to answer the questions to the more advanced kids. So whereas the General Ed, LII and III kids might answer an essay question with a paragraph, the LLIV kids can go deeper, do additional research, and write an essay. If they are doing a group project, the teachers will group the LLIV kids together so they can do a more complex answer. They also switch kids for math which has the added benefit of getting them ready to switch classes in middle school -- I heard this is one critique that middle schools have of LLIV programs that kids are together with the same cohort of 20-25 people for three years and then really struggle when they hit middle school with different kids in every class.

Please. That sounds like a sales pitch, not an actual classroom.

+1 Doesn't sound like the curriculum is differentiated, just the responses. And if it's too hard for the non-LIV kids, you can bet it will become the gen ed curriculum. LIV math in third grade is supposed to be third and fourth grade combined. Is that being taught to the gen ed kids, because that is one of the most challenging parts of AAP?

Did you read the post? The Level 4 kids switch into their own classroom for math. This is not an issue.

[Anonymous]

I'm curious how your LLIV works with the immersion program. We are an immersion school, and have been told that a LLIV would be too complicated to put into place due to the immersion program (i.e. it's impossible to have a kid in both). I'm trying to push for advanced math before 6th grade at our school, if not a full LLIV, and would love my kid to also stay in immersion too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a new system, there's not a lot of experience yet.

This.

Our school uses the clustering model but we are a small school and have a language immersion program so it is pretty much the only way to make LLIV work. DS is not in the grade that kicked it off so we don’t have first hand experience with it. My friends who do seem to be underwhelmed. But their kids are in 3rd grade. Our school also separates the kids into Advanced Math and Regular Math classes in 5th grade, when the jump in grade level happens. This effectively creates a LLIV type class. There is a large crossover between the LIII and Advanced Math kids, at least that is what my child tells me, so that the kids who were Committee Selected for LIV are all in the Advanced Math group and most of the LIII kids are in the Advanced Math group.

I would ask what your school does for Advanced Math. If it is to separate the kids in fifth grade then they are effectively creating a LLIV class anyway. Most of the families at our school choose the base because of the language program. I know a few kids left the language program for the center, one was already bilingual and the other I don’t know about but most stay because they value the langue immersion.