Would removing busses to AAP Centers fix the bus problem?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is FCPS's issue with general ed though. If you want higher standards in general ed just push for them. What will happen is if the standards are decent people won't want to switch schools. Naturally people want to stay at their base school near kids within walking distance.

Just like that huh? Pray tell, how so?

At some elementary schools, all classes are taught with the AAP curriculum. There's some talk of expanding that to all elementary schools, the way some middle schools are all honors classes. So far, in those middle schools, that has been implemented by teaching all classes at an honors level and just leaving some students behind and upset, rather than by watering down the classes.

They should do this without calling it the "AAP or honors curriculum." Just revamp it so that everyone is given more challenging work. Kids will rise to the occasion. And those who need extra or remedial help should be able to get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school is getting rid of LLIV (or rather integrating LLIV into regular classrooms) so there will be two smart kid classes and two dumb kids classes. Most of my kid's LLIV friends are moving to the center so maybe that will at least lead to smaller class sizes..

I really, really hope you are a troll

I am not a troll, this is what we've been told, not in so many words, but there will be Level III/IV classes and Level I/II classes. If that's not segregation into smart/dumb, I don't know what is.

I teach at a Title 1 school with one local Level IV class. There are not enough Level IV kids to fill the class, so it also has Level III and a couple Level II kids. Per the state requirements specific hours (per month) need to be given to the “gifted” students. This is how the county fulfills that state requirement. The goal in the next 2+ years is to push the AAP curriculum down to Gen Ed anyways…I’m not sure how that we go, but we’ll see.

The class you describe is no longer a Level IV class.

I’ll tell you how it will go. The slower students through no fault of their own will crash and burn. The curriculum will get watered down. The teaching will get dumbed down. The students who require a more challenging learning environment (through no fault of their own) will wind up with the short end of the stick. And both China and India will conquer the world with the next generation of highly educated and rigorously trained scientists and engineers while we drown ourselves in the Sea of Mediocrity.

The bold is true, but the anti-AAP brigade here refuses to believe it. I've seen it in action with friends' kids who grew frustrated and bored with being asked by the teachers to "help" other students with math all the time, or who were left to do projects without much teacher interaction or direction because the teachers HAD to focus on the kids who needed more help. And yes, this was in the the local level IV "AAP" classes in a couple of different schools. The fault wasn't the teachers'. The fault was in the myth that teachers can magically differentiate in the classroom even in local level IV. Nope. Those classes will be filled out with kids who don't want to be there and/or don't have the same aptitude as others, and they will not get all the help they need, while the kids who can move faster and absorb more, more quickly, also don't get the very different type of help they need. But we're not supposed to say any of this out loud, oh no. Heaven forbid we should speak frankly about how kids with aptitude have needs too, and how centers have met those needs for years. "At what cost?!" cry the anti-AAP mommies of DCUM. None to you, personally. But you still want to tank the center schools, which work just fine, and actually let your kids' Gen Ed teachers actually have more time for your kids.

What about all the general ed kids who are being left behind while your precious AAP snowflake gets all the best teachers and the best resources while our children are ignored. DO NOT DENY IT YOU KNOW IT'S TRUE. Your babies are so special they deserve all the special things, but all the other kids are just too dumb and don't deserve the good teachers.

I'm sorry, but this sounds so pathetically jealous. How is this attitude helping your child or contributing to the dialogue? If you think your child needs AAP, then ADVOCATE for them. Talk to the teacher, the AART, the administration. Strengthen your materials and submit again. Then again. Don't give up and complain that others have what your kid doesn't if you aren't doing anything about it.

If you feel your child is being left behind, supplement supplement supplement.

The hard truth is that not every kid can handle AAP-level material. If yours can, keep at it until they're in the program. If they can't, accept it and move on.

But don't try to drag down an entire successful program with your pettiness.

I am not the PP but the truth is that the bright kids in ged ed could most likely handle AAP because AAP is an accelerated program and not necessarily a program for the gifted. My kid is in AAP and it honestly feels like what gen ed would have been a couple of decades ago. I have another one in level III services so she gets some services. I still supplement my kids math and writing bc I think ES is just lacking in FCPS.

If they could handle it, they'd be in it. FCPS isn't on a mission to screw a bunch of smart kids.

Have you read the number of kids who are rejected from it in the AAP forum? Yes, bright kids are rejected from it with very high scores. And don't even get me started on the BS appeal process. It is pretty arbitrary and harder to get in at higher income schools. And my kid is in it and she is bright---but wouldn't say she is a genius. There I said it. This is what drivers me bonkers about some AAP parents. You refuse to look at any fault of the program. Saying there are issues is not the same as being anti-AAP or wanting to get rid of it. Somehow you see any criticism of it as an affront to you and your children. Talk about freaking insecurity.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is FCPS's issue with general ed though. If you want higher standards in general ed just push for them. What will happen is if the standards are decent people won't want to switch schools. Naturally people want to stay at their base school near kids within walking distance.

Just like that huh? Pray tell, how so?

At some elementary schools, all classes are taught with the AAP curriculum. There's some talk of expanding that to all elementary schools, the way some middle schools are all honors classes. So far, in those middle schools, that has been implemented by teaching all classes at an honors level and just leaving some students behind and upset, rather than by watering down the classes.

They should do this without calling it the "AAP or honors curriculum." Just revamp it so that everyone is given more challenging work. Kids will rise to the occasion. And those who need extra or remedial help should be able to get it.

This depends on the student population. With high ESOL/Sped populations, it would not work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is FCPS's issue with general ed though. If you want higher standards in general ed just push for them. What will happen is if the standards are decent people won't want to switch schools. Naturally people want to stay at their base school near kids within walking distance.

Just like that huh? Pray tell, how so?

At some elementary schools, all classes are taught with the AAP curriculum. There's some talk of expanding that to all elementary schools, the way some middle schools are all honors classes. So far, in those middle schools, that has been implemented by teaching all classes at an honors level and just leaving some students behind and upset, rather than by watering down the classes.

They should do this without calling it the "AAP or honors curriculum." Just revamp it so that everyone is given more challenging work. Kids will rise to the occasion. And those who need extra or remedial help should be able to get it.

Not all kids will rise to the occasion. A lot of it is dependent on the base school. 90% of the class is reading and doing math at least on grade level? Yes, this will work well. 30% of the class is at least one grade level behind in reading and/or math? No. You can't just accelerate the curriculum and leave 30% of the students who are already struggling to sink. There are not enough people to provide the kind of remediation you're talking about if everyone is in the same class and there are multiple ability levels.

The answer is flexible grouping across all core subjects and FCPS is very touchy about doing that at the elementary level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is FCPS's issue with general ed though. If you want higher standards in general ed just push for them. What will happen is if the standards are decent people won't want to switch schools. Naturally people want to stay at their base school near kids within walking distance.

Just like that huh? Pray tell, how so?

At some elementary schools, all classes are taught with the AAP curriculum. There's some talk of expanding that to all elementary schools, the way some middle schools are all honors classes. So far, in those middle schools, that has been implemented by teaching all classes at an honors level and just leaving some students behind and upset, rather than by watering down the classes.

They should do this without calling it the "AAP or honors curriculum." Just revamp it so that everyone is given more challenging work. Kids will rise to the occasion. And those who need extra or remedial help should be able to get it.

Not all kids will rise to the occasion. A lot of it is dependent on the base school. 90% of the class is reading and doing math at least on grade level? Yes, this will work well. 30% of the class is at least one grade level behind in reading and/or math? No. You can't just accelerate the curriculum and leave 30% of the students who are already struggling to sink. There are not enough people to provide the kind of remediation you're talking about if everyone is in the same class and there are multiple ability levels.

The answer is flexible grouping across all core subjects and FCPS is very touchy about doing that at the elementary level.

Teacher here. I absolutely think there should be three group levels for each subject (Adv/On/Below) but it becomes challenging to make it flexible and have kids going in and out of sections. Adv Math is a full year commitment. So LA and SS/Science should be too.

[Anonymous]

Hi! This is a bus question, if you want to talk about AAP, then go to the AAP forum, where all the tiger moms will indulge you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school is getting rid of LLIV (or rather integrating LLIV into regular classrooms) so there will be two smart kid classes and two dumb kids classes. Most of my kid's LLIV friends are moving to the center so maybe that will at least lead to smaller class sizes..

I really, really hope you are a troll

I am not a troll, this is what we've been told, not in so many words, but there will be Level III/IV classes and Level I/II classes. If that's not segregation into smart/dumb, I don't know what is.

I teach at a Title 1 school with one local Level IV class. There are not enough Level IV kids to fill the class, so it also has Level III and a couple Level II kids. Per the state requirements specific hours (per month) need to be given to the “gifted” students. This is how the county fulfills that state requirement. The goal in the next 2+ years is to push the AAP curriculum down to Gen Ed anyways…I’m not sure how that we go, but we’ll see.

The class you describe is no longer a Level IV class.

I’ll tell you how it will go. The slower students through no fault of their own will crash and burn. The curriculum will get watered down. The teaching will get dumbed down. The students who require a more challenging learning environment (through no fault of their own) will wind up with the short end of the stick. And both China and India will conquer the world with the next generation of highly educated and rigorously trained scientists and engineers while we drown ourselves in the Sea of Mediocrity.

The bold is true, but the anti-AAP brigade here refuses to believe it. I've seen it in action with friends' kids who grew frustrated and bored with being asked by the teachers to "help" other students with math all the time, or who were left to do projects without much teacher interaction or direction because the teachers HAD to focus on the kids who needed more help. And yes, this was in the the local level IV "AAP" classes in a couple of different schools. The fault wasn't the teachers'. The fault was in the myth that teachers can magically differentiate in the classroom even in local level IV. Nope. Those classes will be filled out with kids who don't want to be there and/or don't have the same aptitude as others, and they will not get all the help they need, while the kids who can move faster and absorb more, more quickly, also don't get the very different type of help they need. But we're not supposed to say any of this out loud, oh no. Heaven forbid we should speak frankly about how kids with aptitude have needs too, and how centers have met those needs for years. "At what cost?!" cry the anti-AAP mommies of DCUM. None to you, personally. But you still want to tank the center schools, which work just fine, and actually let your kids' Gen Ed teachers actually have more time for your kids.

If kids can no longer flee to centers, wouldn’t local level programs be stronger because you would have enough kids for a classroom? GT classes back in the day did not have centers. And some of the people bringing these issues up-myself included-are AAP parents. Whenever anyone brings up any criticism of the program to light-some AAP parents lose their minds and automatically assume it’s anti-AAP jealous gen Ed parents. And tons of parents have kids in both AAP and gen Ed.

The option for centers should remain even if level 4 is offered at the base school. Parents should be able to send their kids to centers with kids at similar academic levels. Level 4 at the schools will never be better or even equal except maybe at schools with high SES population.

The entitlement mentality you have is quite astounding. No, if schools all have LLIV, then centers should no longer be an option. FCPS talks a big game with “equity,” but offering one set of kids the choice of two schools and the other set of kids only one needs to end. Deal with it.

LLIV **does not equal** Center instruction.

Class of 12 average- + fast-pace learners will not receive the same level of instruction as a Center class of 24.

You should also do some reading on the differences between "equity" and "equality."

I'm sorry, but I frankly do not care if a LLIV kid isn't receiving *quite* the same level of instruction as a center class. Which I doubt, anyway. A teacher here already said they are receiving the same curriculum.

As for equity vs equality, you never addressed the question of why some kids have two schools to choose from while others are stuck at one school. Not equitable OR equal.

Thank goodness that what you care about doesn't have any influence on reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hi! This is a bus question, if you want to talk about AAP, then go to the AAP forum, where all the tiger moms will indulge you.

No, it is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school is getting rid of LLIV (or rather integrating LLIV into regular classrooms) so there will be two smart kid classes and two dumb kids classes. Most of my kid's LLIV friends are moving to the center so maybe that will at least lead to smaller class sizes..

I really, really hope you are a troll

I am not a troll, this is what we've been told, not in so many words, but there will be Level III/IV classes and Level I/II classes. If that's not segregation into smart/dumb, I don't know what is.

I teach at a Title 1 school with one local Level IV class. There are not enough Level IV kids to fill the class, so it also has Level III and a couple Level II kids. Per the state requirements specific hours (per month) need to be given to the “gifted” students. This is how the county fulfills that state requirement. The goal in the next 2+ years is to push the AAP curriculum down to Gen Ed anyways…I’m not sure how that we go, but we’ll see.

The class you describe is no longer a Level IV class.

I’ll tell you how it will go. The slower students through no fault of their own will crash and burn. The curriculum will get watered down. The teaching will get dumbed down. The students who require a more challenging learning environment (through no fault of their own) will wind up with the short end of the stick. And both China and India will conquer the world with the next generation of highly educated and rigorously trained scientists and engineers while we drown ourselves in the Sea of Mediocrity.

The bold is true, but the anti-AAP brigade here refuses to believe it. I've seen it in action with friends' kids who grew frustrated and bored with being asked by the teachers to "help" other students with math all the time, or who were left to do projects without much teacher interaction or direction because the teachers HAD to focus on the kids who needed more help. And yes, this was in the the local level IV "AAP" classes in a couple of different schools. The fault wasn't the teachers'. The fault was in the myth that teachers can magically differentiate in the classroom even in local level IV. Nope. Those classes will be filled out with kids who don't want to be there and/or don't have the same aptitude as others, and they will not get all the help they need, while the kids who can move faster and absorb more, more quickly, also don't get the very different type of help they need. But we're not supposed to say any of this out loud, oh no. Heaven forbid we should speak frankly about how kids with aptitude have needs too, and how centers have met those needs for years. "At what cost?!" cry the anti-AAP mommies of DCUM. None to you, personally. But you still want to tank the center schools, which work just fine, and actually let your kids' Gen Ed teachers actually have more time for your kids.

If kids can no longer flee to centers, wouldn’t local level programs be stronger because you would have enough kids for a classroom? GT classes back in the day did not have centers. And some of the people bringing these issues up-myself included-are AAP parents. Whenever anyone brings up any criticism of the program to light-some AAP parents lose their minds and automatically assume it’s anti-AAP jealous gen Ed parents. And tons of parents have kids in both AAP and gen Ed.

The option for centers should remain even if level 4 is offered at the base school. Parents should be able to send their kids to centers with kids at similar academic levels. Level 4 at the schools will never be better or even equal except maybe at schools with high SES population.

The entitlement mentality you have is quite astounding. No, if schools all have LLIV, then centers should no longer be an option. FCPS talks a big game with “equity,” but offering one set of kids the choice of two schools and the other set of kids only one needs to end. Deal with it.

LLIV **does not equal** Center instruction.

Class of 12 average- + fast-pace learners will not receive the same level of instruction as a Center class of 24.

You should also do some reading on the differences between "equity" and "equality."

I'm sorry, but I frankly do not care if a LLIV kid isn't receiving *quite* the same level of instruction as a center class. Which I doubt, anyway. A teacher here already said they are receiving the same curriculum.

As for equity vs equality, you never addressed the question of why some kids have two schools to choose from while others are stuck at one school. Not equitable OR equal.

Equality means all students are given the same resources or opportunities to be successful. This would be every student (advanced, on grade, below grade) all receiving the exact same instruction at the exact same pace. I don't think you'd like that because they'd have to teach to a pretty low level to stay equal.

Equity recognizes that each student has different circumstances and is offered various resources or opportunities to be successful. This means that students with needs not in-line with the average (on grade) receive different instruction and opportunities. This applies to both advanced and below grade students. For both groups, that means the pace and location can vary.

For better or worse, FCPS has decided than an equitable solution is offering students of differing levels of needs access to a center school. To remove that option, they'd need to offer an equal offering at the local level. That does not appear to be the case so far, hence the continuation of centers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is FCPS's issue with general ed though. If you want higher standards in general ed just push for them. What will happen is if the standards are decent people won't want to switch schools. Naturally people want to stay at their base school near kids within walking distance.

Just like that huh? Pray tell, how so?

At some elementary schools, all classes are taught with the AAP curriculum. There's some talk of expanding that to all elementary schools, the way some middle schools are all honors classes. So far, in those middle schools, that has been implemented by teaching all classes at an honors level and just leaving some students behind and upset, rather than by watering down the classes.

They should do this without calling it the "AAP or honors curriculum." Just revamp it so that everyone is given more challenging work. Kids will rise to the occasion. And those who need extra or remedial help should be able to get it.

Not all kids will rise to the occasion. A lot of it is dependent on the base school. 90% of the class is reading and doing math at least on grade level? Yes, this will work well. 30% of the class is at least one grade level behind in reading and/or math? No. You can't just accelerate the curriculum and leave 30% of the students who are already struggling to sink. There are not enough people to provide the kind of remediation you're talking about if everyone is in the same class and there are multiple ability levels.

The answer is flexible grouping across all core subjects and FCPS is very touchy about doing that at the elementary level.

+1
I can’t imagine why they’re touchy about it. It would be a much more fair system while still allowing every child to learn at their own pace - without the ridiculous division of AAP vs GE. Most kids are advanced in some areas but not all. FCPS used to do flexible groupings - with a tiny GT program for the very highly gifted. It worked beautifully for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school is getting rid of LLIV (or rather integrating LLIV into regular classrooms) so there will be two smart kid classes and two dumb kids classes. Most of my kid's LLIV friends are moving to the center so maybe that will at least lead to smaller class sizes..

I really, really hope you are a troll

I am not a troll, this is what we've been told, not in so many words, but there will be Level III/IV classes and Level I/II classes. If that's not segregation into smart/dumb, I don't know what is.

I teach at a Title 1 school with one local Level IV class. There are not enough Level IV kids to fill the class, so it also has Level III and a couple Level II kids. Per the state requirements specific hours (per month) need to be given to the “gifted” students. This is how the county fulfills that state requirement. The goal in the next 2+ years is to push the AAP curriculum down to Gen Ed anyways…I’m not sure how that we go, but we’ll see.

The class you describe is no longer a Level IV class.

I’ll tell you how it will go. The slower students through no fault of their own will crash and burn. The curriculum will get watered down. The teaching will get dumbed down. The students who require a more challenging learning environment (through no fault of their own) will wind up with the short end of the stick. And both China and India will conquer the world with the next generation of highly educated and rigorously trained scientists and engineers while we drown ourselves in the Sea of Mediocrity.

The bold is true, but the anti-AAP brigade here refuses to believe it. I've seen it in action with friends' kids who grew frustrated and bored with being asked by the teachers to "help" other students with math all the time, or who were left to do projects without much teacher interaction or direction because the teachers HAD to focus on the kids who needed more help. And yes, this was in the the local level IV "AAP" classes in a couple of different schools. The fault wasn't the teachers'. The fault was in the myth that teachers can magically differentiate in the classroom even in local level IV. Nope. Those classes will be filled out with kids who don't want to be there and/or don't have the same aptitude as others, and they will not get all the help they need, while the kids who can move faster and absorb more, more quickly, also don't get the very different type of help they need. But we're not supposed to say any of this out loud, oh no. Heaven forbid we should speak frankly about how kids with aptitude have needs too, and how centers have met those needs for years. "At what cost?!" cry the anti-AAP mommies of DCUM. None to you, personally. But you still want to tank the center schools, which work just fine, and actually let your kids' Gen Ed teachers actually have more time for your kids.

What about all the general ed kids who are being left behind while your precious AAP snowflake gets all the best teachers and the best resources while our children are ignored. DO NOT DENY IT YOU KNOW IT'S TRUE. Your babies are so special they deserve all the special things, but all the other kids are just too dumb and don't deserve the good teachers.

I'm sorry, but this sounds so pathetically jealous. How is this attitude helping your child or contributing to the dialogue? If you think your child needs AAP, then ADVOCATE for them. Talk to the teacher, the AART, the administration. Strengthen your materials and submit again. Then again. Don't give up and complain that others have what your kid doesn't if you aren't doing anything about it.

If you feel your child is being left behind, supplement supplement supplement.

The hard truth is that not every kid can handle AAP-level material. If yours can, keep at it until they're in the program. If they can't, accept it and move on.

But don't try to drag down an entire successful program with your pettiness.

I am not the PP but the truth is that the bright kids in ged ed could most likely handle AAP because AAP is an accelerated program and not necessarily a program for the gifted. My kid is in AAP and it honestly feels like what gen ed would have been a couple of decades ago. I have another one in level III services so she gets some services. I still supplement my kids math and writing bc I think ES is just lacking in FCPS.

If they could handle it, they'd be in it. FCPS isn't on a mission to screw a bunch of smart kids.

But interestingly, AAP misses quite a few extremely smart kids. You can tell in high school by the number of kids who go on to excellent colleges, who were never in AAP back in elementary and middle. And the opposite is true, as well. Labeling kids so early in life does no one any favors.

THIS x a million

[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:Our school is getting rid of LLIV (or rather integrating LLIV into regular classrooms) so there will be two smart kid classes and two dumb kids classes. Most of my kid's LLIV friends are moving to the center so maybe that will at least lead to smaller class sizes..

I really, really hope you are a troll

I am not a troll, this is what we've been told, not in so many words, but there will be Level III/IV classes and Level I/II classes. If that's not segregation into smart/dumb, I don't know what is.

I teach at a Title 1 school with one local Level IV class. There are not enough Level IV kids to fill the class, so it also has Level III and a couple Level II kids. Per the state requirements specific hours (per month) need to be given to the “gifted” students. This is how the county fulfills that state requirement. The goal in the next 2+ years is to push the AAP curriculum down to Gen Ed anyways…I’m not sure how that we go, but we’ll see.

The class you describe is no longer a Level IV class.

I’ll tell you how it will go. The slower students through no fault of their own will crash and burn. The curriculum will get watered down. The teaching will get dumbed down. The students who require a more challenging learning environment (through no fault of their own) will wind up with the short end of the stick. And both China and India will conquer the world with the next generation of highly educated and rigorously trained scientists and engineers while we drown ourselves in the Sea of Mediocrity.

The bold is true, but the anti-AAP brigade here refuses to believe it. I've seen it in action with friends' kids who grew frustrated and bored with being asked by the teachers to "help" other students with math all the time, or who were left to do projects without much teacher interaction or direction because the teachers HAD to focus on the kids who needed more help. And yes, this was in the the local level IV "AAP" classes in a couple of different schools. The fault wasn't the teachers'. The fault was in the myth that teachers can magically differentiate in the classroom even in local level IV. Nope. Those classes will be filled out with kids who don't want to be there and/or don't have the same aptitude as others, and they will not get all the help they need, while the kids who can move faster and absorb more, more quickly, also don't get the very different type of help they need. But we're not supposed to say any of this out loud, oh no. Heaven forbid we should speak frankly about how kids with aptitude have needs too, and how centers have met those needs for years. "At what cost?!" cry the anti-AAP mommies of DCUM. None to you, personally. But you still want to tank the center schools, which work just fine, and actually let your kids' Gen Ed teachers actually have more time for your kids.

If kids can no longer flee to centers, wouldn’t local level programs be stronger because you would have enough kids for a classroom? GT classes back in the day did not have centers. And some of the people bringing these issues up-myself included-are AAP parents. Whenever anyone brings up any criticism of the program to light-some AAP parents lose their minds and automatically assume it’s anti-AAP jealous gen Ed parents. And tons of parents have kids in both AAP and gen Ed.

The option for centers should remain even if level 4 is offered at the base school. Parents should be able to send their kids to centers with kids at similar academic levels. Level 4 at the schools will never be better or even equal except maybe at schools with high SES population.

The entitlement mentality you have is quite astounding. No, if schools all have LLIV, then centers should no longer be an option. FCPS talks a big game with “equity,” but offering one set of kids the choice of two schools and the other set of kids only one needs to end. Deal with it.

LLIV **does not equal** Center instruction.

Class of 12 average- + fast-pace learners will not receive the same level of instruction as a Center class of 24.

You should also do some reading on the differences between "equity" and "equality."

I'm sorry, but I frankly do not care if a LLIV kid isn't receiving *quite* the same level of instruction as a center class. Which I doubt, anyway. A teacher here already said they are receiving the same curriculum.

As for equity vs equality, you never addressed the question of why some kids have two schools to choose from while others are stuck at one school. Not equitable OR equal.

Thank goodness that what you care about doesn't have any influence on reality.

Keep on deflecting! It’s clear you are unable to answer the question. No surprise there.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Our school is getting rid of LLIV (or rather integrating LLIV into regular classrooms) so there will be two smart kid classes and two dumb kids classes. Most of my kid's LLIV friends are moving to the center so maybe that will at least lead to smaller class sizes..

I really, really hope you are a troll

I am not a troll, this is what we've been told, not in so many words, but there will be Level III/IV classes and Level I/II classes. If that's not segregation into smart/dumb, I don't know what is.

I teach at a Title 1 school with one local Level IV class. There are not enough Level IV kids to fill the class, so it also has Level III and a couple Level II kids. Per the state requirements specific hours (per month) need to be given to the “gifted” students. This is how the county fulfills that state requirement. The goal in the next 2+ years is to push the AAP curriculum down to Gen Ed anyways…I’m not sure how that we go, but we’ll see.

The class you describe is no longer a Level IV class.

I’ll tell you how it will go. The slower students through no fault of their own will crash and burn. The curriculum will get watered down. The teaching will get dumbed down. The students who require a more challenging learning environment (through no fault of their own) will wind up with the short end of the stick. And both China and India will conquer the world with the next generation of highly educated and rigorously trained scientists and engineers while we drown ourselves in the Sea of Mediocrity.

The bold is true, but the anti-AAP brigade here refuses to believe it. I've seen it in action with friends' kids who grew frustrated and bored with being asked by the teachers to "help" other students with math all the time, or who were left to do projects without much teacher interaction or direction because the teachers HAD to focus on the kids who needed more help. And yes, this was in the the local level IV "AAP" classes in a couple of different schools. The fault wasn't the teachers'. The fault was in the myth that teachers can magically differentiate in the classroom even in local level IV. Nope. Those classes will be filled out with kids who don't want to be there and/or don't have the same aptitude as others, and they will not get all the help they need, while the kids who can move faster and absorb more, more quickly, also don't get the very different type of help they need. But we're not supposed to say any of this out loud, oh no. Heaven forbid we should speak frankly about how kids with aptitude have needs too, and how centers have met those needs for years. "At what cost?!" cry the anti-AAP mommies of DCUM. None to you, personally. But you still want to tank the center schools, which work just fine, and actually let your kids' Gen Ed teachers actually have more time for your kids.

If kids can no longer flee to centers, wouldn’t local level programs be stronger because you would have enough kids for a classroom? GT classes back in the day did not have centers. And some of the people bringing these issues up-myself included-are AAP parents. Whenever anyone brings up any criticism of the program to light-some AAP parents lose their minds and automatically assume it’s anti-AAP jealous gen Ed parents. And tons of parents have kids in both AAP and gen Ed.

The option for centers should remain even if level 4 is offered at the base school. Parents should be able to send their kids to centers with kids at similar academic levels. Level 4 at the schools will never be better or even equal except maybe at schools with high SES population.

The entitlement mentality you have is quite astounding. No, if schools all have LLIV, then centers should no longer be an option. FCPS talks a big game with “equity,” but offering one set of kids the choice of two schools and the other set of kids only one needs to end. Deal with it.

LLIV **does not equal** Center instruction.

Class of 12 average- + fast-pace learners will not receive the same level of instruction as a Center class of 24.

You should also do some reading on the differences between "equity" and "equality."

I'm sorry, but I frankly do not care if a LLIV kid isn't receiving *quite* the same level of instruction as a center class. Which I doubt, anyway. A teacher here already said they are receiving the same curriculum.

As for equity vs equality, you never addressed the question of why some kids have two schools to choose from while others are stuck at one school. Not equitable OR equal.

Thank goodness that what you care about doesn't have any influence on reality.

Keep on deflecting! It’s clear you are unable to answer the question. No surprise there.

I answered your question, agro. You just don't like the answer.

[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:Our school is getting rid of LLIV (or rather integrating LLIV into regular classrooms) so there will be two smart kid classes and two dumb kids classes. Most of my kid's LLIV friends are moving to the center so maybe that will at least lead to smaller class sizes..

I really, really hope you are a troll

I am not a troll, this is what we've been told, not in so many words, but there will be Level III/IV classes and Level I/II classes. If that's not segregation into smart/dumb, I don't know what is.

I teach at a Title 1 school with one local Level IV class. There are not enough Level IV kids to fill the class, so it also has Level III and a couple Level II kids. Per the state requirements specific hours (per month) need to be given to the “gifted” students. This is how the county fulfills that state requirement. The goal in the next 2+ years is to push the AAP curriculum down to Gen Ed anyways…I’m not sure how that we go, but we’ll see.

The class you describe is no longer a Level IV class.

I’ll tell you how it will go. The slower students through no fault of their own will crash and burn. The curriculum will get watered down. The teaching will get dumbed down. The students who require a more challenging learning environment (through no fault of their own) will wind up with the short end of the stick. And both China and India will conquer the world with the next generation of highly educated and rigorously trained scientists and engineers while we drown ourselves in the Sea of Mediocrity.

The bold is true, but the anti-AAP brigade here refuses to believe it. I've seen it in action with friends' kids who grew frustrated and bored with being asked by the teachers to "help" other students with math all the time, or who were left to do projects without much teacher interaction or direction because the teachers HAD to focus on the kids who needed more help. And yes, this was in the the local level IV "AAP" classes in a couple of different schools. The fault wasn't the teachers'. The fault was in the myth that teachers can magically differentiate in the classroom even in local level IV. Nope. Those classes will be filled out with kids who don't want to be there and/or don't have the same aptitude as others, and they will not get all the help they need, while the kids who can move faster and absorb more, more quickly, also don't get the very different type of help they need. But we're not supposed to say any of this out loud, oh no. Heaven forbid we should speak frankly about how kids with aptitude have needs too, and how centers have met those needs for years. "At what cost?!" cry the anti-AAP mommies of DCUM. None to you, personally. But you still want to tank the center schools, which work just fine, and actually let your kids' Gen Ed teachers actually have more time for your kids.

If kids can no longer flee to centers, wouldn’t local level programs be stronger because you would have enough kids for a classroom? GT classes back in the day did not have centers. And some of the people bringing these issues up-myself included-are AAP parents. Whenever anyone brings up any criticism of the program to light-some AAP parents lose their minds and automatically assume it’s anti-AAP jealous gen Ed parents. And tons of parents have kids in both AAP and gen Ed.

The option for centers should remain even if level 4 is offered at the base school. Parents should be able to send their kids to centers with kids at similar academic levels. Level 4 at the schools will never be better or even equal except maybe at schools with high SES population.

The entitlement mentality you have is quite astounding. No, if schools all have LLIV, then centers should no longer be an option. FCPS talks a big game with “equity,” but offering one set of kids the choice of two schools and the other set of kids only one needs to end. Deal with it.

LLIV **does not equal** Center instruction.

Class of 12 average- + fast-pace learners will not receive the same level of instruction as a Center class of 24.

You should also do some reading on the differences between "equity" and "equality."

I'm sorry, but I frankly do not care if a LLIV kid isn't receiving *quite* the same level of instruction as a center class. Which I doubt, anyway. A teacher here already said they are receiving the same curriculum.

As for equity vs equality, you never addressed the question of why some kids have two schools to choose from while others are stuck at one school. Not equitable OR equal.

Equality means all students are given the same resources or opportunities to be successful. This would be every student (advanced, on grade, below grade) all receiving the exact same instruction at the exact same pace. I don't think you'd like that because they'd have to teach to a pretty low level to stay equal.

Equity recognizes that each student has different circumstances and is offered various resources or opportunities to be successful. This means that students with needs not in-line with the average (on grade) receive different instruction and opportunities. This applies to both advanced and below grade students. For both groups, that means the pace and location can vary.

For better or worse, FCPS has decided than an equitable solution is offering students of differing levels of needs access to a center school. To remove that option, they'd need to offer an equal offering at the local level. That does not appear to be the case so far, hence the continuation of centers.

In practice equity means that on grade level kids who aren't in aap get ignored because kids who are behind need time and attention to catch up.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Our school is getting rid of LLIV (or rather integrating LLIV into regular classrooms) so there will be two smart kid classes and two dumb kids classes. Most of my kid's LLIV friends are moving to the center so maybe that will at least lead to smaller class sizes..

I really, really hope you are a troll

I am not a troll, this is what we've been told, not in so many words, but there will be Level III/IV classes and Level I/II classes. If that's not segregation into smart/dumb, I don't know what is.

I teach at a Title 1 school with one local Level IV class. There are not enough Level IV kids to fill the class, so it also has Level III and a couple Level II kids. Per the state requirements specific hours (per month) need to be given to the “gifted” students. This is how the county fulfills that state requirement. The goal in the next 2+ years is to push the AAP curriculum down to Gen Ed anyways…I’m not sure how that we go, but we’ll see.

The class you describe is no longer a Level IV class.

I’ll tell you how it will go. The slower students through no fault of their own will crash and burn. The curriculum will get watered down. The teaching will get dumbed down. The students who require a more challenging learning environment (through no fault of their own) will wind up with the short end of the stick. And both China and India will conquer the world with the next generation of highly educated and rigorously trained scientists and engineers while we drown ourselves in the Sea of Mediocrity.

The bold is true, but the anti-AAP brigade here refuses to believe it. I've seen it in action with friends' kids who grew frustrated and bored with being asked by the teachers to "help" other students with math all the time, or who were left to do projects without much teacher interaction or direction because the teachers HAD to focus on the kids who needed more help. And yes, this was in the the local level IV "AAP" classes in a couple of different schools. The fault wasn't the teachers'. The fault was in the myth that teachers can magically differentiate in the classroom even in local level IV. Nope. Those classes will be filled out with kids who don't want to be there and/or don't have the same aptitude as others, and they will not get all the help they need, while the kids who can move faster and absorb more, more quickly, also don't get the very different type of help they need. But we're not supposed to say any of this out loud, oh no. Heaven forbid we should speak frankly about how kids with aptitude have needs too, and how centers have met those needs for years. "At what cost?!" cry the anti-AAP mommies of DCUM. None to you, personally. But you still want to tank the center schools, which work just fine, and actually let your kids' Gen Ed teachers actually have more time for your kids.

If kids can no longer flee to centers, wouldn’t local level programs be stronger because you would have enough kids for a classroom? GT classes back in the day did not have centers. And some of the people bringing these issues up-myself included-are AAP parents. Whenever anyone brings up any criticism of the program to light-some AAP parents lose their minds and automatically assume it’s anti-AAP jealous gen Ed parents. And tons of parents have kids in both AAP and gen Ed.

The option for centers should remain even if level 4 is offered at the base school. Parents should be able to send their kids to centers with kids at similar academic levels. Level 4 at the schools will never be better or even equal except maybe at schools with high SES population.

The entitlement mentality you have is quite astounding. No, if schools all have LLIV, then centers should no longer be an option. FCPS talks a big game with “equity,” but offering one set of kids the choice of two schools and the other set of kids only one needs to end. Deal with it.

LLIV **does not equal** Center instruction.

Class of 12 average- + fast-pace learners will not receive the same level of instruction as a Center class of 24.

You should also do some reading on the differences between "equity" and "equality."

I'm sorry, but I frankly do not care if a LLIV kid isn't receiving *quite* the same level of instruction as a center class. Which I doubt, anyway. A teacher here already said they are receiving the same curriculum.

As for equity vs equality, you never addressed the question of why some kids have two schools to choose from while others are stuck at one school. Not equitable OR equal.

Equality means all students are given the same resources or opportunities to be successful. This would be every student (advanced, on grade, below grade) all receiving the exact same instruction at the exact same pace. I don't think you'd like that because they'd have to teach to a pretty low level to stay equal.

Equity recognizes that each student has different circumstances and is offered various resources or opportunities to be successful. This means that students with needs not in-line with the average (on grade) receive different instruction and opportunities. This applies to both advanced and below grade students. For both groups, that means the pace and location can vary.

For better or worse, FCPS has decided than an equitable solution is offering students of differing levels of needs access to a center school. To remove that option, they'd need to offer an equal offering at the local level. That does not appear to be the case so far, hence the continuation of centers.

In practice equity means that on grade level kids who aren't in aap get ignored because kids who are behind need time and attention to catch up.

Unfortunately the same thing would happen to the AAP kids if the gen ed kids were combined with them. Teacher is always going to instruct at the lowest level. No child left behind and all that.

Below level + On grade = On grade loses
On grade + Advanced = Advanced loses