AAP Center Elimination Rumors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Ok. But there are schools that have a large enough cohort. In my opinion, the centers should only be allowed if the cohort is too small. Why should we bus kids to a center when there is a large enough cohort with a designated class. I know our center pulls from two schools. Both of these schools including my own, has a designated AAP class (not cluster model) and routinely has enough kids (12-17 kids)

It's crazy that you are anti busing AAP kids but are just fine with a 1:12 teacher to student ratio only for AAP. Doubtful that general ed classes have that ratio.

Wow. No, mommy, principals place other smart students into the Level IV class to make sure it is a similar size to the other classrooms. Most of these kids would have gotten into AAP if they were in a Title I or lower SES school anyway, so it works out. Your little baby is not "gifted" as much as you want to think s/he is. Principal placed kids do just as well if not better than the kids who got into AAP because their 2nd grade teacher liked them.

Principal placed kids get there because parents suck up to them.
Second grade teachers of the student are not on the selection committee for full time AAP.
Principal placing kids who did not make the cut into classrooms are part of the reason people prefer centers. The peer group has all been selected by a neutral centralized committee rather than who sucks up to the principal.

AAP is an advanced program. It must be hard for you to accept that even with a lower standard than gifted your kid still didn't make the cut. It's not the end of the world.

You're absolutely right, it's not the end of the world, yet here you are getting suuuuper defensive and freaking out and insulting people that you 100% know are telling the truth but oh boy, you just can't handle the fact that your child isn't as precious as you think s/he is. Trust me, my kids are going to end up in the exact same AP classes as yours in high school and will probably blow them out of the water.

You were the first to bring up kids saying my "little baby isnt gifted as I think he is." Well it's a good thing there are tests that independently confirmed giftedness for them. No sucking up needed.

It's very weird that you are comparing your kids future academic success to that of strangers. You sound very insecure about needing that annual principal placement for your future academic rockstar.

Yeah some people are really bothered by their kids not being selected for AAP. I enjoy listening to them complain and denigrate others kids.

If they stood back and took a second to breathe, they would understand that the kids are really where they need to be and should be happy the system allows this much flexibility for everyone’s learning needs.

Where is the flexibility for the remedial children? Where are their centers? Why do they have to be lumped in with all of the normal children while your special snowflake gets advanced math and extra special worksheets in AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jealous GenEd parents never give up. First it was changing the name to AAP from G&T now this.

LOL!! I have a child in AAP and even I know it is not a Gifted & Talented program. If it was, the vast majority of kids would not qualify.

Anyway, it's my understanding that G&T was an entirely different program than AAP.

+1
Oh, it absolutely was. GT was a very tiny and extremely selective program for the few gifted kids who truly needed a separate learning environment. They changed the name to AAP when they opened it up and lowered the admissions standards. Weird that the PP thinks it was parents who made them change the name, but typical.

+1
When it was GT, an elementary school with "prestige" was likely to send 7 or 8 kids of a grade level to a center--at most. Now the same elementary school has over 50 (likely more) in an AAP center.
And, there were certainly no "twice exceptional" kids included.

+2
Now what they have are two huge groups of mostly very similar kids. If AAP and GE was a Venn diagram, the overlap in the middle would take up most of the diagram. It's only the far edges on both ends that actually need special supports.

Sure, whatever you have to tell yourself to cope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Ok. But there are schools that have a large enough cohort. In my opinion, the centers should only be allowed if the cohort is too small. Why should we bus kids to a center when there is a large enough cohort with a designated class. I know our center pulls from two schools. Both of these schools including my own, has a designated AAP class (not cluster model) and routinely has enough kids (12-17 kids)

It's crazy that you are anti busing AAP kids but are just fine with a 1:12 teacher to student ratio only for AAP. Doubtful that general ed classes have that ratio.

Wow. No, mommy, principals place other smart students into the Level IV class to make sure it is a similar size to the other classrooms. Most of these kids would have gotten into AAP if they were in a Title I or lower SES school anyway, so it works out. Your little baby is not "gifted" as much as you want to think s/he is. Principal placed kids do just as well if not better than the kids who got into AAP because their 2nd grade teacher liked them.

Principal placed kids get there because parents suck up to them.
Second grade teachers of the student are not on the selection committee for full time AAP.
Principal placing kids who did not make the cut into classrooms are part of the reason people prefer centers. The peer group has all been selected by a neutral centralized committee rather than who sucks up to the principal.

AAP is an advanced program. It must be hard for you to accept that even with a lower standard than gifted your kid still didn't make the cut. It's not the end of the world.

You're absolutely right, it's not the end of the world, yet here you are getting suuuuper defensive and freaking out and insulting people that you 100% know are telling the truth but oh boy, you just can't handle the fact that your child isn't as precious as you think s/he is. Trust me, my kids are going to end up in the exact same AP classes as yours in high school and will probably blow them out of the water.

You were the first to bring up kids saying my "little baby isnt gifted as I think he is." Well it's a good thing there are tests that independently confirmed giftedness for them. No sucking up needed.

It's very weird that you are comparing your kids future academic success to that of strangers. You sound very insecure about needing that annual principal placement for your future academic rockstar.

Yeah some people are really bothered by their kids not being selected for AAP. I enjoy listening to them complain and denigrate others kids.

If they stood back and took a second to breathe, they would understand that the kids are really where they need to be and should be happy the system allows this much flexibility for everyone’s learning needs.

Where is the flexibility for the remedial children? Where are their centers? Why do they have to be lumped in with all of the normal children while your special snowflake gets advanced math and extra special worksheets in AAP?

Blame the "push in" remedial parents for that. AAP parents have achieved what you want for your kids, and rather than do something to help your own all you do is insult the ones who succeeded. Try advocating to fix your problem instead of being jealous of others who have addressed theirs.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Ok. But there are schools that have a large enough cohort. In my opinion, the centers should only be allowed if the cohort is too small. Why should we bus kids to a center when there is a large enough cohort with a designated class. I know our center pulls from two schools. Both of these schools including my own, has a designated AAP class (not cluster model) and routinely has enough kids (12-17 kids)

It's crazy that you are anti busing AAP kids but are just fine with a 1:12 teacher to student ratio only for AAP. Doubtful that general ed classes have that ratio.

Wow. No, mommy, principals place other smart students into the Level IV class to make sure it is a similar size to the other classrooms. Most of these kids would have gotten into AAP if they were in a Title I or lower SES school anyway, so it works out. Your little baby is not "gifted" as much as you want to think s/he is. Principal placed kids do just as well if not better than the kids who got into AAP because their 2nd grade teacher liked them.

Principal placed kids get there because parents suck up to them.
Second grade teachers of the student are not on the selection committee for full time AAP.
Principal placing kids who did not make the cut into classrooms are part of the reason people prefer centers. The peer group has all been selected by a neutral centralized committee rather than who sucks up to the principal.

AAP is an advanced program. It must be hard for you to accept that even with a lower standard than gifted your kid still didn't make the cut. It's not the end of the world.

You're absolutely right, it's not the end of the world, yet here you are getting suuuuper defensive and freaking out and insulting people that you 100% know are telling the truth but oh boy, you just can't handle the fact that your child isn't as precious as you think s/he is. Trust me, my kids are going to end up in the exact same AP classes as yours in high school and will probably blow them out of the water.

You were the first to bring up kids saying my "little baby isnt gifted as I think he is." Well it's a good thing there are tests that independently confirmed giftedness for them. No sucking up needed.

It's very weird that you are comparing your kids future academic success to that of strangers. You sound very insecure about needing that annual principal placement for your future academic rockstar.

Yeah some people are really bothered by their kids not being selected for AAP. I enjoy listening to them complain and denigrate others kids.

If they stood back and took a second to breathe, they would understand that the kids are really where they need to be and should be happy the system allows this much flexibility for everyone’s learning needs.

DP. Except - it doesn’t. Plenty of kids are advanced in one/two subjects but not all. Pullouts are useless and mean nothing. The different “levels” are absurd. Those kids deserve to have *their* needs met just as much as the kids who are in full time AAP.

Instead, they are locked (and labeled) into one group with zero flexibility to move up. And don’t say, “Oh, they can reapply every year.” That’s an entire YEAR wasted.

Flexible groupings are the answer that would allow ALL students to reach their potential at any given time. Frankly, I find it disgraceful that FCPS chooses to divide and label two enormous groups of kids, as if they don’t overlap greatly. They do.

Flexible groupings can’t happen in most schools in FCPS because of the massive range of skills and abilities. 1993 called to remind you we are not in a 5% FARMs school district with strong parenting and discipline encouraged at home and school. Times have changed dramaticallly.

If AAP kids "deserve" to have a sequestered and uninterrupted learning environment, then so do all the very bright Gen Ed kids. Flexible groupings absolutely can - and should - be implemented. There only need to be three levels, maybe four. Advanced, grade level, and remedial.

The problem is that remedial is mixed in with gen Ed and pulls the gen ed classroom environment down.
Gen Ed parents then get mad that AAP kids don't have to deal with those things and try to dismantle AAP out of spite.
Parents of Gen Ed kids should focus on having remedial kids removed rather than trying to make the AAP environment worse to make things "equal."

AAP Center Teacher here. I have several friends who teach at a LL4. The AAP curriculum is not what it was even last year. Every kid is doing Benchmark. The MAJORITY of schools teach Adv Math. SS and Science isn’t that different. The kids in my center class are doing the same things as my friends are doing with their Local Level 4 classes. At this point, there is no point to centers if the schools have a Local Level 4 class with a good peer group.

So, saying this not as a parent, but as an AAP teacher in the county. I love working with gifted kids. The vast majority of my class is not gifted. They should all be educated at their base schools.

Don’t care.

Maybe just an anecdote, but kid is in a class that actually reads and discusses books at their center and is thriving.

Before, kid was in a class with chair throwers and kids who were two grades behind with a teacher saying there isn’t much they can do for them.

This is the reality for many kids who don’t live in McLean and Vienna.

There are also the equivalent of "chair throwers" in some AAP classes. Falling out tantrums, etc.

Sure. Just not in ours.

Not in ours either. It is the peer group that are the benefit in centers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Ok. But there are schools that have a large enough cohort. In my opinion, the centers should only be allowed if the cohort is too small. Why should we bus kids to a center when there is a large enough cohort with a designated class. I know our center pulls from two schools. Both of these schools including my own, has a designated AAP class (not cluster model) and routinely has enough kids (12-17 kids)

It's crazy that you are anti busing AAP kids but are just fine with a 1:12 teacher to student ratio only for AAP. Doubtful that general ed classes have that ratio.

Wow. No, mommy, principals place other smart students into the Level IV class to make sure it is a similar size to the other classrooms. Most of these kids would have gotten into AAP if they were in a Title I or lower SES school anyway, so it works out. Your little baby is not "gifted" as much as you want to think s/he is. Principal placed kids do just as well if not better than the kids who got into AAP because their 2nd grade teacher liked them.

Principal placed kids get there because parents suck up to them.
Second grade teachers of the student are not on the selection committee for full time AAP.
Principal placing kids who did not make the cut into classrooms are part of the reason people prefer centers. The peer group has all been selected by a neutral centralized committee rather than who sucks up to the principal.

AAP is an advanced program. It must be hard for you to accept that even with a lower standard than gifted your kid still didn't make the cut. It's not the end of the world.

You're absolutely right, it's not the end of the world, yet here you are getting suuuuper defensive and freaking out and insulting people that you 100% know are telling the truth but oh boy, you just can't handle the fact that your child isn't as precious as you think s/he is. Trust me, my kids are going to end up in the exact same AP classes as yours in high school and will probably blow them out of the water.

You were the first to bring up kids saying my "little baby isnt gifted as I think he is." Well it's a good thing there are tests that independently confirmed giftedness for them. No sucking up needed.

It's very weird that you are comparing your kids future academic success to that of strangers. You sound very insecure about needing that annual principal placement for your future academic rockstar.

Yeah some people are really bothered by their kids not being selected for AAP. I enjoy listening to them complain and denigrate others kids.

If they stood back and took a second to breathe, they would understand that the kids are really where they need to be and should be happy the system allows this much flexibility for everyone’s learning needs.

Where is the flexibility for the remedial children? Where are their centers? Why do they have to be lumped in with all of the normal children while your special snowflake gets advanced math and extra special worksheets in AAP?

Blame the "push in" remedial parents for that. AAP parents have achieved what you want for your kids, and rather than do something to help your own all you do is insult the ones who succeeded. Try advocating to fix your problem instead of being jealous of others who have addressed theirs.

+1 it's the "push in" brigade and ESOL. Every time this is discussed we hear about studies saying it's best to "push in" for these types of learners but there is no discussion on how it impacts other average general education students. This is why people do anything to get their kids out of those classrooms and into AAP. They should be spending time trying to get a separate general education classroom instead of trying to ruin the AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jealous GenEd parents never give up. First it was changing the name to AAP from G&T now this.

LOL!! I have a child in AAP and even I know it is not a Gifted & Talented program. If it was, the vast majority of kids would not qualify.

Anyway, it's my understanding that G&T was an entirely different program than AAP.

+1
Oh, it absolutely was. GT was a very tiny and extremely selective program for the few gifted kids who truly needed a separate learning environment. They changed the name to AAP when they opened it up and lowered the admissions standards. Weird that the PP thinks it was parents who made them change the name, but typical.

+1
When it was GT, an elementary school with "prestige" was likely to send 7 or 8 kids of a grade level to a center--at most. Now the same elementary school has over 50 (likely more) in an AAP center.
And, there were certainly no "twice exceptional" kids included.

+2
Now what they have are two huge groups of mostly very similar kids. If AAP and GE was a Venn diagram, the overlap in the middle would take up most of the diagram. It's only the far edges on both ends that actually need special supports.

Sure, whatever you have to tell yourself to cope.

[Anonymous]

That's not very nice. I'm an AAP teacher and my kids went through the program at a different school. It absolutely is like a Venn Diagram, with most kids in the middle - they would do fine in either GE or AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Ok. But there are schools that have a large enough cohort. In my opinion, the centers should only be allowed if the cohort is too small. Why should we bus kids to a center when there is a large enough cohort with a designated class. I know our center pulls from two schools. Both of these schools including my own, has a designated AAP class (not cluster model) and routinely has enough kids (12-17 kids)

It's crazy that you are anti busing AAP kids but are just fine with a 1:12 teacher to student ratio only for AAP. Doubtful that general ed classes have that ratio.

Wow. No, mommy, principals place other smart students into the Level IV class to make sure it is a similar size to the other classrooms. Most of these kids would have gotten into AAP if they were in a Title I or lower SES school anyway, so it works out. Your little baby is not "gifted" as much as you want to think s/he is. Principal placed kids do just as well if not better than the kids who got into AAP because their 2nd grade teacher liked them.

Principal placed kids get there because parents suck up to them.
Second grade teachers of the student are not on the selection committee for full time AAP.
Principal placing kids who did not make the cut into classrooms are part of the reason people prefer centers. The peer group has all been selected by a neutral centralized committee rather than who sucks up to the principal.

AAP is an advanced program. It must be hard for you to accept that even with a lower standard than gifted your kid still didn't make the cut. It's not the end of the world.

You're absolutely right, it's not the end of the world, yet here you are getting suuuuper defensive and freaking out and insulting people that you 100% know are telling the truth but oh boy, you just can't handle the fact that your child isn't as precious as you think s/he is. Trust me, my kids are going to end up in the exact same AP classes as yours in high school and will probably blow them out of the water.

You were the first to bring up kids saying my "little baby isnt gifted as I think he is." Well it's a good thing there are tests that independently confirmed giftedness for them. No sucking up needed.

It's very weird that you are comparing your kids future academic success to that of strangers. You sound very insecure about needing that annual principal placement for your future academic rockstar.

Yeah some people are really bothered by their kids not being selected for AAP. I enjoy listening to them complain and denigrate others kids.

If they stood back and took a second to breathe, they would understand that the kids are really where they need to be and should be happy the system allows this much flexibility for everyone’s learning needs.

Where is the flexibility for the remedial children? Where are their centers? Why do they have to be lumped in with all of the normal children while your special snowflake gets advanced math and extra special worksheets in AAP?

Blame the "push in" remedial parents for that. AAP parents have achieved what you want for your kids, and rather than do something to help your own all you do is insult the ones who succeeded. Try advocating to fix your problem instead of being jealous of others who have addressed theirs.

+1 it's the "push in" brigade and ESOL. Every time this is discussed we hear about studies saying it's best to "push in" for these types of learners but there is no discussion on how it impacts other average general education students. This is why people do anything to get their kids out of those classrooms and into AAP. They should be spending time trying to get a separate general education classroom instead of trying to ruin the AAP.

Ridiculous. There are students with push in services in AAP too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our base school is a center and I would fully support this! The kids who come from other schools are like outsiders, no connection to our neighborhood.

let me guess haycock...

No Lemon Road. The bussed in kids cause a lot of problems.

Seriously? They’re coming from Westgate and Shrevewood 🙄
What kind of “problems” do these kids pose?

If anything, I feel badly for the kids assigned to a center school that don’t qualify for AAP; truly an “us” vs “them” scenario.

Yes, it sucks to have a bright kid at a center but not in aap. Wish we had a choice. The kids see kids that they are smarter than getting to learn stuff that they don't get to learn and they don't understand why they don't get to. Man, and some of the aap families are jerks about how "gifted and talented" they are.

We specifically avoided looking at houses zoned to AAP Center schools for this reason - my kids were entering 2nd & 4th when we moved so I knew one was not going to be in AAP and I didn't want to subject her to what I knew from just being at an LLIV school was going to be so much cliquishness and pettiness from AAP girls.

DP. Unfortunately, our school became an AAP center only after we had moved to the neighborhood, so we had no choice but to stay. And yes, it was miserable.

A lot of this is presumed to be due to AAP but not necessarily. We are at a center school, my son is in AAP and at least between the athletic kids, it's a good mix of kids from AAP and gen ed. Now my kid had a best friend in the 2nd grade class, but moved on in third grade. I overheard the parent assuming it had to do with AAP snobbery, but really it was that that kid didn't participate in the soccer teams at recess! So they drifted apart due to different interests, not AAP status.

Are you sure they were at recess at the same time? That is not a given.

Yes, each entire grade is out at the same time, at least so far through third grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Ok. But there are schools that have a large enough cohort. In my opinion, the centers should only be allowed if the cohort is too small. Why should we bus kids to a center when there is a large enough cohort with a designated class. I know our center pulls from two schools. Both of these schools including my own, has a designated AAP class (not cluster model) and routinely has enough kids (12-17 kids)

It's crazy that you are anti busing AAP kids but are just fine with a 1:12 teacher to student ratio only for AAP. Doubtful that general ed classes have that ratio.

Wow. No, mommy, principals place other smart students into the Level IV class to make sure it is a similar size to the other classrooms. Most of these kids would have gotten into AAP if they were in a Title I or lower SES school anyway, so it works out. Your little baby is not "gifted" as much as you want to think s/he is. Principal placed kids do just as well if not better than the kids who got into AAP because their 2nd grade teacher liked them.

Principal placed kids get there because parents suck up to them.
Second grade teachers of the student are not on the selection committee for full time AAP.
Principal placing kids who did not make the cut into classrooms are part of the reason people prefer centers. The peer group has all been selected by a neutral centralized committee rather than who sucks up to the principal.

AAP is an advanced program. It must be hard for you to accept that even with a lower standard than gifted your kid still didn't make the cut. It's not the end of the world.

You're absolutely right, it's not the end of the world, yet here you are getting suuuuper defensive and freaking out and insulting people that you 100% know are telling the truth but oh boy, you just can't handle the fact that your child isn't as precious as you think s/he is. Trust me, my kids are going to end up in the exact same AP classes as yours in high school and will probably blow them out of the water.

You were the first to bring up kids saying my "little baby isnt gifted as I think he is." Well it's a good thing there are tests that independently confirmed giftedness for them. No sucking up needed.

It's very weird that you are comparing your kids future academic success to that of strangers. You sound very insecure about needing that annual principal placement for your future academic rockstar.

Yeah some people are really bothered by their kids not being selected for AAP. I enjoy listening to them complain and denigrate others kids.

If they stood back and took a second to breathe, they would understand that the kids are really where they need to be and should be happy the system allows this much flexibility for everyone’s learning needs.

Where is the flexibility for the remedial children? Where are their centers? Why do they have to be lumped in with all of the normal children while your special snowflake gets advanced math and extra special worksheets in AAP?

Are you serious? The elimination of leveled classrooms/tracking and the mainstreaming of remedial and special ed students was the result of parents of those students pushing for mainstreaming. Parents of advanced and on-level kids didn't do any of this to you - point your finger at your own counterparts from the last decades.

Currently, you could advocate for more tracking in every school - but I'd be ready from blowback from other parents who don't want to see their kid in the remedial class, even if it would be the best fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Ok. But there are schools that have a large enough cohort. In my opinion, the centers should only be allowed if the cohort is too small. Why should we bus kids to a center when there is a large enough cohort with a designated class. I know our center pulls from two schools. Both of these schools including my own, has a designated AAP class (not cluster model) and routinely has enough kids (12-17 kids)

It's crazy that you are anti busing AAP kids but are just fine with a 1:12 teacher to student ratio only for AAP. Doubtful that general ed classes have that ratio.

Wow. No, mommy, principals place other smart students into the Level IV class to make sure it is a similar size to the other classrooms. Most of these kids would have gotten into AAP if they were in a Title I or lower SES school anyway, so it works out. Your little baby is not "gifted" as much as you want to think s/he is. Principal placed kids do just as well if not better than the kids who got into AAP because their 2nd grade teacher liked them.

Principal placed kids get there because parents suck up to them.
Second grade teachers of the student are not on the selection committee for full time AAP.
Principal placing kids who did not make the cut into classrooms are part of the reason people prefer centers. The peer group has all been selected by a neutral centralized committee rather than who sucks up to the principal.

AAP is an advanced program. It must be hard for you to accept that even with a lower standard than gifted your kid still didn't make the cut. It's not the end of the world.

You're absolutely right, it's not the end of the world, yet here you are getting suuuuper defensive and freaking out and insulting people that you 100% know are telling the truth but oh boy, you just can't handle the fact that your child isn't as precious as you think s/he is. Trust me, my kids are going to end up in the exact same AP classes as yours in high school and will probably blow them out of the water.

You were the first to bring up kids saying my "little baby isnt gifted as I think he is." Well it's a good thing there are tests that independently confirmed giftedness for them. No sucking up needed.

It's very weird that you are comparing your kids future academic success to that of strangers. You sound very insecure about needing that annual principal placement for your future academic rockstar.

Yeah some people are really bothered by their kids not being selected for AAP. I enjoy listening to them complain and denigrate others kids.

If they stood back and took a second to breathe, they would understand that the kids are really where they need to be and should be happy the system allows this much flexibility for everyone’s learning needs.

Where is the flexibility for the remedial children? Where are their centers? Why do they have to be lumped in with all of the normal children while your special snowflake gets advanced math and extra special worksheets in AAP?

A good number of people would love to have tracked classes so that kids are taught at the level that they need. I would love there to be remedial classes. I think they should be smaller classes, 15 kids, supported by reading and math specialists. That would give the teacher time to focus on helping the kids learn the skills they need and move into the regular track class.

I would like to have a class for kids who are on grade level and a class for kids who are ahead of grade level. These classes could be a bit bigger because the teachers have fewer groupings to worry about and are focused on teaching material at grade level or ahead of grade level. The kids are on track and should need less support then remedial kids, so the classes can be bigger.

That is never going to happen because people will flip out when they see remedial classes that are full of kids who some from families with little to know academic support at home, mainly poor families. In our area that will mean mainly Black kids who come from generational poverty and Hispanic kids who come from immigrant families. Both groups tend not to have a history of strong academics. Toss in that the class of advanced learners is likely to be mainly Asian families, where there is a culture that focuses on education as a tool for advancement through better jobs and positions, and White kids in the grade level and advanced group and, well, we can't have that.

The argument for the push in classes is that it is better for the kids who are behind so that they don't feel lesser and so that they are motivated to catch their peers. Never mind that it hasn't actually worked and kids are falling further behind, we have classes that include everybody and that is awesome.

We are asking schools to find a way to educate kids who go home to empty houses because parents are working with no books, because the parents don't read or can't read, with no support to practice skills they are learning at school. And when that doesn't work, because the kids don't have support at home, we tell teachers they can't give hoework, because some kids don't have parents who can help them so homework isn't fair. And now all the kids are hurt, the kids who don't have support but who are able to it on their own, the kids with parents who can help them if they need help, because there is a population that doesn't have help at home.

The answer shouldn't be hurt the kids who have a program because they are ahead and can participate in the program. The answer should be finding a way to work with all the kids while understanding that there are some kids who we can't help. Try and find a way to help those kids but don't hurt the rest of the kids. Right now it feels like we are slowing down 60% of the kids to benefit 15% of the kids and those 15% are not benefiting. The ones who are getting something out of school are the 15%-20% in AAP who are allowed to learn at a regular, slightly advanced pace.

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

Ok. But there are schools that have a large enough cohort. In my opinion, the centers should only be allowed if the cohort is too small. Why should we bus kids to a center when there is a large enough cohort with a designated class. I know our center pulls from two schools. Both of these schools including my own, has a designated AAP class (not cluster model) and routinely has enough kids (12-17 kids)

It's crazy that you are anti busing AAP kids but are just fine with a 1:12 teacher to student ratio only for AAP. Doubtful that general ed classes have that ratio.

Wow. No, mommy, principals place other smart students into the Level IV class to make sure it is a similar size to the other classrooms. Most of these kids would have gotten into AAP if they were in a Title I or lower SES school anyway, so it works out. Your little baby is not "gifted" as much as you want to think s/he is. Principal placed kids do just as well if not better than the kids who got into AAP because their 2nd grade teacher liked them.

Principal placed kids get there because parents suck up to them.
Second grade teachers of the student are not on the selection committee for full time AAP.
Principal placing kids who did not make the cut into classrooms are part of the reason people prefer centers. The peer group has all been selected by a neutral centralized committee rather than who sucks up to the principal.

AAP is an advanced program. It must be hard for you to accept that even with a lower standard than gifted your kid still didn't make the cut. It's not the end of the world.

You're absolutely right, it's not the end of the world, yet here you are getting suuuuper defensive and freaking out and insulting people that you 100% know are telling the truth but oh boy, you just can't handle the fact that your child isn't as precious as you think s/he is. Trust me, my kids are going to end up in the exact same AP classes as yours in high school and will probably blow them out of the water.

You were the first to bring up kids saying my "little baby isnt gifted as I think he is." Well it's a good thing there are tests that independently confirmed giftedness for them. No sucking up needed.

It's very weird that you are comparing your kids future academic success to that of strangers. You sound very insecure about needing that annual principal placement for your future academic rockstar.

Yeah some people are really bothered by their kids not being selected for AAP. I enjoy listening to them complain and denigrate others kids.

If they stood back and took a second to breathe, they would understand that the kids are really where they need to be and should be happy the system allows this much flexibility for everyone’s learning needs.

Where is the flexibility for the remedial children? Where are their centers? Why do they have to be lumped in with all of the normal children while your special snowflake gets advanced math and extra special worksheets in AAP?

Blame the "push in" remedial parents for that. AAP parents have achieved what you want for your kids, and rather than do something to help your own all you do is insult the ones who succeeded. Try advocating to fix your problem instead of being jealous of others who have addressed theirs.

+1 it's the "push in" brigade and ESOL. Every time this is discussed we hear about studies saying it's best to "push in" for these types of learners but there is no discussion on how it impacts other average general education students. This is why people do anything to get their kids out of those classrooms and into AAP. They should be spending time trying to get a separate general education classroom instead of trying to ruin the AAP.

Ridiculous. There are students with push in services in AAP too.

I don't think the push in they are discussing is IEP services, which yes does exist and can be highly appropriate for some kids, but the lack of tracking based on ability because the idea is that the kids who are behind will be motivated to catch their peers.

We lost tracking because the remedial classes were warehouses for kids to hang out in until they dropped out and little learning. The solution was to stop tracking with the idea being that the kids who are behind would be more motivated to learn because they see kids who are learning and want to catch them. I think that works on the margins, a C student might be motivated to do a bit more when working with kids getting A's and B's but the D and F student didn't care before and isn't likely to be motivated now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jealous GenEd parents never give up. First it was changing the name to AAP from G&T now this.

LOL!! I have a child in AAP and even I know it is not a Gifted & Talented program. If it was, the vast majority of kids would not qualify.

Anyway, it's my understanding that G&T was an entirely different program than AAP.

+1
Oh, it absolutely was. GT was a very tiny and extremely selective program for the few gifted kids who truly needed a separate learning environment. They changed the name to AAP when they opened it up and lowered the admissions standards. Weird that the PP thinks it was parents who made them change the name, but typical.

+1
When it was GT, an elementary school with "prestige" was likely to send 7 or 8 kids of a grade level to a center--at most. Now the same elementary school has over 50 (likely more) in an AAP center.
And, there were certainly no "twice exceptional" kids included.

Have you ever been around actual GT kids? It would be mostly the "2e" kids - exceptionally bright but with asynchronous social development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That's not very nice. I'm an AAP teacher and my kids went through the program at a different school. It absolutely is like a Venn Diagram, with most kids in the middle - they would do fine in either GE or AAP.

+1

Only the kids at the ends have truly specialized needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jealous GenEd parents never give up. First it was changing the name to AAP from G&T now this.

LOL!! I have a child in AAP and even I know it is not a Gifted & Talented program. If it was, the vast majority of kids would not qualify.

Anyway, it's my understanding that G&T was an entirely different program than AAP.

+1
Oh, it absolutely was. GT was a very tiny and extremely selective program for the few gifted kids who truly needed a separate learning environment. They changed the name to AAP when they opened it up and lowered the admissions standards. Weird that the PP thinks it was parents who made them change the name, but typical.

+1
When it was GT, an elementary school with "prestige" was likely to send 7 or 8 kids of a grade level to a center--at most. Now the same elementary school has over 50 (likely more) in an AAP center.
And, there were certainly no "twice exceptional" kids included.

Have you ever been around actual GT kids? It would be mostly the "2e" kids - exceptionally bright but with asynchronous social development.

2E means gifted plus learning disability, not just quirky kid with poor social skills.