FCPS potential changes to AAP
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
It makes sense to me since a lot of the testing and the process selecting kids for the program is biased against blacks. |
Anonymous
Haha yeah math is bias |
Anonymous
|
More ridiculousness from the School Board sure to be soon on display.
How great FCPS will be when they find completely arbitrary ways to recognize the giftedness of an additional 10% of the white kids and 25% of the black and Hispanic kids...or maybe the academic program for the other 60% will just be even more of a joke... |
Anonymous
The can follow MCPS. As long as there is a cohort of high achieving kids in your school you do not need to be in any type of magnet regardless of your achievement level. It is really a very creative way to manipulate the kids who are in gifted programs. |
Anonymous
| AAP is biased against whites, not minorities. |
Anonymous
How can they get 25% black and hispanic kids in certain schools when most areas of mclean and langley are 70% white and 25% Asian? This only makes sense in areas outside of mclean and langley pyramids. |
Anonymous
You're misunderstanding. They're not going to have 25% of the kids in AAP be African American and another 25% be Hispanic. They instead want 25% of the African Americans to be found AAP eligible. So, if McLean schools have only 8 black kids, they want 2 of them to be found AAP eligible. The actual AAP class will still be almost entirely white and Asian, as that is the demographic makeup of the schools. |
Anonymous
I think it's pretty obvious that they are speaking of 25% of the entire district's population of black and hispanic kids. So, in schools where there are 10 black/hispanic kids, they want 2-3 of them getting advanced classes. In schools where there are 200 black/hispanic kids, they want 50 of them getting advanced classes. The real question is what do they mean they are going to put Level 4 AAP in every school? That would apparently mean all four subjects are taught at the "advanced" level every day. So, if FCPS is going to give advanced instruction to 25% of black and hispanic kids who to date have not been passing the screening tests at high enough rates to be at 25% participation... then one has to wonder if the benchmark for getting "advanced" instruction is going to be different (i.e. lowered) at schools with more minorities. In order to get to 25% participation, would the benchmark be 110 instead of 132? Will the local schools (or perhaps pyramids) be doing the selection rather than a central committee? i.e. a group of teachers/admins within West Potomac's pyramid would decide what the benchmark score is and who gets into AAP at the local schools in that pyramid. But, the criteria might be different in another pyramid (or even within another elementary school)? And while I know there isn't much consistency among AAP centers now, I imagine there will be even greater differences between AAP in some schools vs. others if they are changing the standards for who gets in. Maybe this is all just a veneer for "tracking" but making it more racially equal. I'm not opposed to having kids put in different classes based on ability. I am a little worried that what they are going to call "AAP" is not going to be truly advanced. Let the experimentation begin! |
Anonymous
There have been accusations on this forum that schools are deliberately hoarding their gifted URM students so they will receive better equity scores. It is plausible that schools would give much lower GBRS scores to URMs, either because they want to keep them at the base school or because teachers are biased enough that they aren't recognizing giftedness in minorities. I'm not a fan of the idea of lowering score requirements for URMs, but I think the committee should be taking a long look at any URM kids who have CogAT or NNAT above 125, above grade level DRA, generally high achievement, but then get low GBRS and/or have terrible school supplied work samples. |
Anonymous
It’s not just the GRBS, the COGAT and DRA scores have also been effected by biased teachers. |
Anonymous
that’s BS, the program is run by white supremacists. We can see who is underrepresented and that is who they hate the most. They are just mad because the ones the consider honorary whites have happened to fair better than they have when it comes to getting admitted into to the program |
Anonymous
Someone theorized upthread that this means expanding Level 3 (and maybe Level 2) services. There are some who see no value in pull-out instruction but, having received it as part of the gifted program I was in as an elementary student, I think it can be valuable and shouldn't be dismissed. |
Anonymous
|
Are they planning to lump all Asians together, or will they separate by group? There already seem to be huge differences in AAP representation based on country of origin for Asians, such that some Asian ethnicities are effectively URMs, while others are very over-represented.
Also, when they try to look at SES-based representation, are they planning to just have it be FARMS vs. not-FARMS, or will there be a little more granularity? People who are not poor enough to be FARMS, but are not much above that threshold are probably more demographically similar to FARMS kids than they are to high SES kids. |
Anonymous
Not even close. I know a lot of kids with borderline scores who don't seem very smart or advanced, yet got accepted to AAP. They're all white. Likewise, within AAP, the majority of kids who don't seem like they belong there, are bombing tests, and have work that doesn't seem up to AAP standards are white. I am white, and I'm really skeptical of about half of the white kids in AAP. |
Anonymous
When they say they want local level 4 in every ES, then that would mean, by definition, that kids receive advanced instruction in all 4 core subjects. I guess they could get shifty on us and TEACH some kids at an advanced level in all four subjects (calling it level 4), but it could be different groups of kids receiving different subjects at advanced levels (very few receiving adv. instruction in all four). i.e. ES has a classroom of 3rd graders and one teacher. The teacher teaches everyone "on grade level" for English and then pulls 4 kids (Adis, Bren, Chaz, and Denton) to the side for "advanced" learning (ie giving them an extra project to work on). Then the teacher teaches the whole class "on grade level" for social studies and pulls 4 kids (Bren, Edwardo, Fia, Greta) , and to the side for advanced learning in Social studies. Then kids some kids leave that class and go to a different room for adv. math where 30 kids are taught adv. math (including Adis, Chaz, Edwardo, Fia and Greta). There are a lot of questions about what they mean by having level 4 in every school. What does that mean for teachers (day to day)? What does that mean for kids (who gets adv. instruction)? And how will they be chosen? The school board seems to be keeping this on the down low... but they usually have a plan worked out that they aren't telling the public about yet. They go through the ruse of having public comments and acting like they haven't decided anything yet. But, experience tells me they know where this is going. |