FCPS potential changes to AAP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The problem with AAP is their are multiple opportunities to self select and appeal

It's not that hard the only criteria should be

Student is in the second grade screening pool. The second grade screening pool is created based on scores from FCPS-administered ability tests given to students in Grades 1 and 2. Pool students are not guaranteed eligibility, but they are automatically referred for screening.

Then say the top 300 or so student scores county wide should be selected for AAP IV. That's it cut and dry no appeals

People should still be able to get a WISC from a qualified provider (maybe just allow GMU) and be screened based on that. After all, a WISC is a much better and much more accurate test than the NNAT or CogAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The problem with AAP is their are multiple opportunities to self select and appeal

It's not that hard the only criteria should be

Student is in the second grade screening pool. The second grade screening pool is created based on scores from FCPS-administered ability tests given to students in Grades 1 and 2. Pool students are not guaranteed eligibility, but they are automatically referred for screening.

Then say the top 300 or so student scores county wide should be selected for AAP IV. That's it cut and dry no appeals

People should still be able to get a WISC from a qualified provider (maybe just allow GMU) and be screened based on that. After all, a WISC is a much better and much more accurate test than the NNAT or CogAT.

They should just give everyone a WISC then

[Anonymous]

I'm the PP. It's true and has been the case for the last 2-3 years. I have their scores, it is a simple report to run. Takes about 30 seconds.

Serious question: Why do you run the report? How does affect what you do?

It's included in a larger report: previous SOL scores, DRA levels, and iReady results. I use it mainly to review previous DRA and SOL scores. With the SOL report, it helps me see which sections they struggled with the previous year. But there is a correlation with the students getting 1 and 2s in class - when using the full AA curriculum - with those with low NNAT and CogAT scores.

Does it include WISC scores if those were submitted for the application?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The problem with AAP is their are multiple opportunities to self select and appeal

It's not that hard the only criteria should be

Student is in the second grade screening pool. The second grade screening pool is created based on scores from FCPS-administered ability tests given to students in Grades 1 and 2. Pool students are not guaranteed eligibility, but they are automatically referred for screening.

Then say the top 300 or so student scores county wide should be selected for AAP IV. That's it cut and dry no appeals

People should still be able to get a WISC from a qualified provider (maybe just allow GMU) and be screened based on that. After all, a WISC is a much better and much more accurate test than the NNAT or CogAT.

They should just give everyone a WISC then

Maybe give the WISC to all kids who score a 125 or higher on the NNAT or CogAT? Since the WISC is more expensive, use the other tests in order to determine who is given the WISC. Kids with a certain score on the WISC are accepted into AAP. And maybe instead of centers, each pryamid has an AAP only school, so that more kids can attend per pyramid and you remove some of the resource competition between Gen Ed programs and AAP programs at Center schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The problem with AAP is their are multiple opportunities to self select and appeal

It's not that hard the only criteria should be

Student is in the second grade screening pool. The second grade screening pool is created based on scores from FCPS-administered ability tests given to students in Grades 1 and 2. Pool students are not guaranteed eligibility, but they are automatically referred for screening.

Then say the top 300 or so student scores county wide should be selected for AAP IV. That's it cut and dry no appeals

People should still be able to get a WISC from a qualified provider (maybe just allow GMU) and be screened based on that. After all, a WISC is a much better and much more accurate test than the NNAT or CogAT.

They should just give everyone a WISC then

And the FCPS administered tests are too biased. They would have to come up with a more unbiased evaluation and testing process. The schools don’t want to spend the money on all that

[Anonymous]

Maybe give the WISC to all kids who score a 125 or higher on the NNAT or CogAT? Since the WISC is more expensive, use the other tests in order to determine who is given the WISC. Kids with a certain score on the WISC are accepted into AAP. And maybe instead of centers, each pryamid has an AAP only school, so that more kids can attend per pyramid and you remove some of the resource competition between Gen Ed programs and AAP programs at Center schools.

People would not like center schools which were only AAP because that would mean taking away a school from a neighborhood. Schools are very important to their neighborhoods: they are often centers of activity for the community.

[Anonymous]

Anyone attend or watch the board meeting a couple weeks ago? Are they moving forward with this?

[Anonymous]

Check out the documents attached to both the 3/7 school board meeting (re: Ignite goals) and the work session for 3/11 re: AAP.

A lot of stats about how many from each group are participating now and how many they plan to ramp up to. They definitely want at least 25% of each group to be getting AAP. And then they want it to be equal across groups. So, one might ask, what about groups like Asians who are already above 25%? Are they really going to have 40% of all FCPS kids getting "AAP"? I have to assume that they are going to give some sort of "advanced" lessons to more kids and take credit for equalizing AAP to minorities. They want Level 4 AAP in all schools -- but they don't say what they will do with the centers (if they will exist or not).

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BA4AJV67B507/$file/AAP%20Presentation_031119mg.pdf

See p. 10-14 for a lot of the goals: https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/B9ZPE351B679/$file/Strategic%20Plan%20Success%20-%20Metrics%2C%20Targets%20and%20Aspirations.pdf

[Anonymous]

Yes but the school board defines AAP as including levels 1-3 not just level 4 when considering equity goals for participation. So this is just more beaurocratic posturing rather than anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes but the school board defines AAP as including levels 1-3 not just level 4 when considering equity goals for participation. So this is just more beaurocratic posturing rather than anything else.

+1 At most schools, Level III is a one hour pullout once per week that doesn't seem to affect anything else. So, I bet a lot of URMs will suddenly become Level III eligible in the near future. Then the schools will all pat themselves on the back and claim to be equitable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes but the school board defines AAP as including levels 1-3 not just level 4 when considering equity goals for participation. So this is just more beaurocratic posturing rather than anything else.

This makes sense, but ho do you know this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Check out the documents attached to both the 3/7 school board meeting (re: Ignite goals) and the work session for 3/11 re: AAP.

A lot of stats about how many from each group are participating now and how many they plan to ramp up to. They definitely want at least 25% of each group to be getting AAP. And then they want it to be equal across groups. So, one might ask, what about groups like Asians who are already above 25%? Are they really going to have 40% of all FCPS kids getting "AAP"? I have to assume that they are going to give some sort of "advanced" lessons to more kids and take credit for equalizing AAP to minorities. They want Level 4 AAP in all schools -- but they don't say what they will do with the centers (if they will exist or not).

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BA4AJV67B507/$file/AAP%20Presentation_031119mg.pdf

See p. 10-14 for a lot of the goals: https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/B9ZPE351B679/$file/Strategic%20Plan%20Success%20-%20Metrics%2C%20Targets%20and%20Aspirations.pdf

That’s what private schools are for or if your child is truly that advanced ask that he or she skip a grade

[Anonymous]

I've seen the board docs and they show the current AAP participation rates for 4 categories: Asian 40%, White 30%, and Black and Hispanic, as I think 15% each. If you want the groups to be even, then the first two groups participation rates would have to down unless they expanded the local level 4 or other levels to include more URMs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes but the school board defines AAP as including levels 1-3 not just level 4 when considering equity goals for participation. So this is just more beaurocratic posturing rather than anything else.

This makes sense, but ho do you know this?

From the board docs links - that is how the board docs are defining AAP totals for each race - by including AAP levels 2 3 and 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've seen the board docs and they show the current AAP participation rates for 4 categories: Asian 40%, White 30%, and Black and Hispanic, as I think 15% each. If you want the groups to be even, then the first two groups participation rates would have to down unless they expanded the local level 4 or other levels to include more URMs.

Think they will increase the number of kids found eligible. If they plan to switch to all local level V it won't overcrowd any school because the school would have to accommodate all its students anyway. The balance of AAP to gen Ed would change.