AAP Center Elimination Rumors

[Anonymous]

Adding on, a few years ago when we were doing VGA there was a report you could compare schools performances. I was shocked to see the LL4s were sometimes outperforming the centers on math. This was for math 7.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We left bc the lliv program was less stable - at the orientation, they shared that they were moving toward cluster model, that it would depend on numbers. It felt like it would be same as second-grade classroom.

I agree that it would be nice/cheaper to keep kids local. But then there needs to be some standardization of the local programs.

Agree. Local Level IV are not the same as a center. Each principal runs them however they want and they don’t have to meet FCPS’s center practices.

What does this even mean? Isn't there a set curriculum?

The local level 4 doesn’t have to consist of only Level IV identified kids. The principal can put whomever they want in it. The core classes are not taught to only level IV identified kids. They can be grouped with the whole grade. So yo7 have a very different peer group which leads to a different pace and depth of instruction even with the same curriculum.

I teach at Local Level 4. The kids principal placed are also high achieving students. In fact, some of my Level 3 kids perform higher than some of my Level 4 kids who could have chosen the center. The AAP classes at the center are filled with kids who somehow got in as well. Your argument doesn’t hold regarding LL4 classes that are designated as the Level 4 class with principal placement. Secondly, if you think there are no kids who struggle academically in a center, you are clearly unaware.

I wonder how much undiagnosed ADHD is prevalent in the level IV kids, ie 2e. My kid has a high FSIQ per a WISC, but now at end of third, I'm starting to think there's also some mild ADHD thrown in as well.

[Anonymous]

I have had several Level 4 kids with ADHD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We left bc the lliv program was less stable - at the orientation, they shared that they were moving toward cluster model, that it would depend on numbers. It felt like it would be same as second-grade classroom.

I agree that it would be nice/cheaper to keep kids local. But then there needs to be some standardization of the local programs.

Agree. Local Level IV are not the same as a center. Each principal runs them however they want and they don’t have to meet FCPS’s center practices.

What does this even mean? Isn't there a set curriculum?

The local level 4 doesn’t have to consist of only Level IV identified kids. The principal can put whomever they want in it. The core classes are not taught to only level IV identified kids. They can be grouped with the whole grade. So yo7 have a very different peer group which leads to a different pace and depth of instruction even with the same curriculum.

I teach at Local Level 4. The kids principal placed are also high achieving students. In fact, some of my Level 3 kids perform higher than some of my Level 4 kids who could have chosen the center. The AAP classes at the center are filled with kids who somehow got in as well. Your argument doesn’t hold regarding LL4 classes that are designated as the Level 4 class with principal placement. Secondly, if you think there are no kids who struggle academically in a center, you are clearly unaware.

I wonder how much undiagnosed ADHD is prevalent in the level IV kids, ie 2e. My kid has a high FSIQ per a WISC, but now at end of third, I'm starting to think there's also some mild ADHD thrown in as well.

I have 3 kids with ADHD and full time level IV AAP. The older two didn’t get diagnosed until the end of 5th and end of 7th. The younger was diagnosed in 2nd, it took several years for my youngest to be accepted into AAP.

If you suspect ADHD you should have your kid tested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm angry about comparing kids to kids at their own school instead of the entire FCPS population. I literally know a family that picked a house zoned to a Title I school so their child would get into AAP. My child has higher test scores (NNAT, COGAT, iready, SOL, everything) but because we're at a school with lots of highly educated, wealthy families, my kid didn't get in. Why is her child more deserving of a better education than mine just because she goes to school with poor kids?

If your school has a ton of smart kids, your child already has a cohort of smart kids. They don’t need to go to another school to get one.

The curriculum is different. Why should her kid get advanced math but mine doesn't just because all the other kids are smart? That's STUPID.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm angry about comparing kids to kids at their own school instead of the entire FCPS population. I literally know a family that picked a house zoned to a Title I school so their child would get into AAP. My child has higher test scores (NNAT, COGAT, iready, SOL, everything) but because we're at a school with lots of highly educated, wealthy families, my kid didn't get in. Why is her child more deserving of a better education than mine just because she goes to school with poor kids?

If your school has a ton of smart kids, your child already has a cohort of smart kids. They don’t need to go to another school to get one.

The curriculum is different. Why should her kid get advanced math but mine doesn't just because all the other kids are smart? That's STUPID.

Advanced Math is offered at every school. Your kid will have a chance to take Advanced Math. Kids in LIV get Advanced Math but plenty of kids not in LIV are placed in Advanced Math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm angry about comparing kids to kids at their own school instead of the entire FCPS population. I literally know a family that picked a house zoned to a Title I school so their child would get into AAP. My child has higher test scores (NNAT, COGAT, iready, SOL, everything) but because we're at a school with lots of highly educated, wealthy families, my kid didn't get in. Why is her child more deserving of a better education than mine just because she goes to school with poor kids?

If your school has a ton of smart kids, your child already has a cohort of smart kids. They don’t need to go to another school to get one.

The curriculum is different. Why should her kid get advanced math but mine doesn't just because all the other kids are smart? That's STUPID.

Advanced Math is offered at every school. Your kid will have a chance to take Advanced Math. Kids in LIV get Advanced Math but plenty of kids not in LIV are placed in Advanced Math.

This is not true at every school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way ffx county does AAP centers seems crazy to me. So much churn for kids going to different schools and then back (seems to be what everybody is against in the boundary forum - instability for kids).

Going to a center is an option. Kids canary at their base school of theu prefer. But the center option needs to stay for those who want it.

DP. The center option is redundant and wasteful as almost all elementary schools now have AAP. Centers need to be a thing of the past.

[Anonymous]

[mastodon]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way ffx county does AAP centers seems crazy to me. So much churn for kids going to different schools and then back (seems to be what everybody is against in the boundary forum - instability for kids).

Going to a center is an option. Kids canary at their base school of theu prefer. But the center option needs to stay for those who want it.

DP. The center option is redundant and wasteful as almost all elementary schools now have AAP. Centers need to be a thing of the past.

I hope not. Centers are the best elementary and middle school programming FCPS has. Glad my kid could take advantage of this opportunity and hope FCPS doesn’t change anything regarding centers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[mastodon]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way ffx county does AAP centers seems crazy to me. So much churn for kids going to different schools and then back (seems to be what everybody is against in the boundary forum - instability for kids).

Going to a center is an option. Kids canary at their base school of theu prefer. But the center option needs to stay for those who want it.

DP. The center option is redundant and wasteful as almost all elementary schools now have AAP. Centers need to be a thing of the past.

I hope not. Centers are the best elementary and middle school programming FCPS has. Glad my kid could take advantage of this opportunity and hope FCPS doesn’t change anything regarding centers.

+1 the peer group is far far better in the center.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[mastodon]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way ffx county does AAP centers seems crazy to me. So much churn for kids going to different schools and then back (seems to be what everybody is against in the boundary forum - instability for kids).

Going to a center is an option. Kids canary at their base school of theu prefer. But the center option needs to stay for those who want it.

DP. The center option is redundant and wasteful as almost all elementary schools now have AAP. Centers need to be a thing of the past.

I hope not. Centers are the best elementary and middle school programming FCPS has. Glad my kid could take advantage of this opportunity and hope FCPS doesn’t change anything regarding centers.

+1 the peer group is far far better in the center.

Excuse me while I vomit.

[Anonymous]

Centers are needed in schools where there aren’t enough level 4 kids to make a whole class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm angry about comparing kids to kids at their own school instead of the entire FCPS population. I literally know a family that picked a house zoned to a Title I school so their child would get into AAP. My child has higher test scores (NNAT, COGAT, iready, SOL, everything) but because we're at a school with lots of highly educated, wealthy families, my kid didn't get in. Why is her child more deserving of a better education than mine just because she goes to school with poor kids?

If your school has a ton of smart kids, your child already has a cohort of smart kids. They don’t need to go to another school to get one.

The curriculum is different. Why should her kid get advanced math but mine doesn't just because all the other kids are smart? That's STUPID.

Advanced Math is offered at every school. Your kid will have a chance to take Advanced Math. Kids in LIV get Advanced Math but plenty of kids not in LIV are placed in Advanced Math.

I'm not sure our center school has advanced math for kids outside of the aap level 4 kids. If it did, my kid should have been in it. He's had teachers say he should be in advanced math, but it's too bad... there's nothing they can do....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm angry about comparing kids to kids at their own school instead of the entire FCPS population. I literally know a family that picked a house zoned to a Title I school so their child would get into AAP. My child has higher test scores (NNAT, COGAT, iready, SOL, everything) but because we're at a school with lots of highly educated, wealthy families, my kid didn't get in. Why is her child more deserving of a better education than mine just because she goes to school with poor kids?

If your school has a ton of smart kids, your child already has a cohort of smart kids. They don’t need to go to another school to get one.

The curriculum is different. Why should her kid get advanced math but mine doesn't just because all the other kids are smart? That's STUPID.

Advanced Math is offered at every school. Your kid will have a chance to take Advanced Math. Kids in LIV get Advanced Math but plenty of kids not in LIV are placed in Advanced Math.

This is not true at every school.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We left bc the lliv program was less stable - at the orientation, they shared that they were moving toward cluster model, that it would depend on numbers. It felt like it would be same as second-grade classroom.

I agree that it would be nice/cheaper to keep kids local. But then there needs to be some standardization of the local programs.

Agree. Local Level IV are not the same as a center. Each principal runs them however they want and they don’t have to meet FCPS’s center practices.

What does this even mean? Isn't there a set curriculum?

The local level 4 doesn’t have to consist of only Level IV identified kids. The principal can put whomever they want in it. The core classes are not taught to only level IV identified kids. They can be grouped with the whole grade. So yo7 have a very different peer group which leads to a different pace and depth of instruction even with the same curriculum.

I teach at Local Level 4. The kids principal placed are also high achieving students. In fact, some of my Level 3 kids perform higher than some of my Level 4 kids who could have chosen the center. The AAP classes at the center are filled with kids who somehow got in as well. Your argument doesn’t hold regarding LL4 classes that are designated as the Level 4 class with principal placement. Secondly, if you think there are no kids who struggle academically in a center, you are clearly unaware.

This. This is what is so frustrating for the parents of kids who are bright and motivated level 3 kids (likely outperforming many levels 4 kids), but being told they don't need access to the curriculum. Why?
Why does the school hold these kids back?