New Budget Recommendations -- eliminate AAP busing and centers

[Anonymous]

Yes, the pp is arguing that centers are unnecessary because 10 years ago GT students were "always" in their base schools. I pointed out this is not true.

The point is that separate education (centers) for AAP kids is unnecessary. They can be taught in their own base schools, as they used to be. It's interesting that AAP parents think their kids need to be taught separately, but that it's just fine for the kids at the opposite end of the spectrum to be fully integrated in the General Ed. classes. If it's fine for those kids, then it should be fine for the AAP kids. Right? Or are AAP kids somehow entitled to a separate educational experience?

I disagree.

You disagree with what part? That kids on the lower end of the spectrum should be included in "regular" classrooms, or that AAP kids should be? Because if we're going to push for inclusion of all kids, then why should AAP be any different? No need for a special learning environment.

I disagree with your post.

I disagree too. Dunno where you got the not-so-interesting idea that all AAP parents think its just fine for every child but their own to have the same educational experience. Try again without the straw man.

[Anonymous]

I also disagree. But it doesn't matter what I think as I am not Superintendent Garza. She and the School Board make the decisions about the budget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes they are entitled to a different experience-such is the nature of special Ed

Now this is just silly. It is a known fact that AAP is NOT special Ed. There may be some kids within AAP who have LDs, but the program as a whole isn't considered "special ed." Sorry.

The original mandate to even have GT (now AAP) is that it was "special education" for children who truly do learn differently. Take away the special ed part and you really don't have a reason to separate out these kids into centers.

[Anonymous]

AAP parent here-eliminate busing to save money. Keep it in the poorer communities who only have a few students to bus that would otherwise not be abLe to attend, but eliminate it in region 1. That would be reasonable and fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AAP parent here-eliminate busing to save money. Keep it in the poorer communities who only have a few students to bus that would otherwise not be abLe to attend, but eliminate it in region 1. That would be reasonable and fair.

Sounds good to me, but please stop referring to Regions 2-5 as "the poorer communities". We've been over this before. Just say, "eliminate busing in Region 1, where it is not needed".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AAP parent here-eliminate busing to save money. Keep it in the poorer communities who only have a few students to bus that would otherwise not be abLe to attend, but eliminate it in region 1. That would be reasonable and fair.

Sounds good to me, but please stop referring to Regions 2-5 as "the poorer communities". We've been over this before. Just say, "eliminate busing in Region 1, where it is not needed".

It is not that cut and dried. McLean pyrimid is in Region 2 and Langley pyrimid goes to Region 2 for AAP MS (at least for this year).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AAP parent here-eliminate busing to save money. Keep it in the poorer communities who only have a few students to bus that would otherwise not be abLe to attend, but eliminate it in region 1. That would be reasonable and fair.

Sounds good to me, but please stop referring to Regions 2-5 as "the poorer communities". We've been over this before. Just say, "eliminate busing in Region 1, where it is not needed".

PP here-and if you can read, I did not refer to regions 2-5 as the "poorer communities". Talk about hypersensitivity!

I only know my own region-and mostly I was referring to Mt Vernon area and Title 1 schools if you could read between the lines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes they are entitled to a different experience-such is the nature of special Ed

Now this is just silly. It is a known fact that AAP is NOT special Ed. There may be some kids within AAP who have LDs, but the program as a whole isn't considered "special ed." Sorry.

The original mandate to even have GT (now AAP) is that it was "special education" for children who truly do learn differently. Take away the special ed part and you really don't have a reason to separate out these kids into centers.

Gifted education is special education in every sense of the word. Don't see anyone clamoring to get rid of the other end of the spectrum of special Ed and stop mainstreaming kids with autism, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, the pp is arguing that centers are unnecessary because 10 years ago GT students were "always" in their base schools. I pointed out this is not true.

The point is that separate education (centers) for AAP kids is unnecessary. They can be taught in their own base schools, as they used to be. It's interesting that AAP parents think their kids need to be taught separately, but that it's just fine for the kids at the opposite end of the spectrum to be fully integrated in the General Ed. classes. If it's fine for those kids, then it should be fine for the AAP kids. Right? Or are AAP kids somehow entitled to a separate educational experience?

I disagree.

You disagree with what part? That kids on the lower end of the spectrum should be included in "regular" classrooms, or that AAP kids should be? Because if we're going to push for inclusion of all kids, then why should AAP be any different? No need for a special learning environment.

I disagree with your post.

I disagree too. Dunno where you got the not-so-interesting idea that all AAP parents think its just fine for every child but their own to have the same educational experience. Try again without the straw man.

Gosh, I don't know... maybe I got that idea after hearing AAP parents demanding ad nauseum to send their kids to centers and have them in AAP-only classrooms. Just a wild guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes they are entitled to a different experience-such is the nature of special Ed

Now this is just silly. It is a known fact that AAP is NOT special Ed. There may be some kids within AAP who have LDs, but the program as a whole isn't considered "special ed." Sorry.

The original mandate to even have GT (now AAP) is that it was "special education" for children who truly do learn differently. Take away the special ed part and you really don't have a reason to separate out these kids into centers.

Gifted education is special education in every sense of the word. Don't see anyone clamoring to get rid of the other end of the spectrum of special Ed and stop mainstreaming kids with autism, etc.

Well, in the sense of the law it isn't. So there is that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes they are entitled to a different experience-such is the nature of special Ed

Now this is just silly. It is a known fact that AAP is NOT special Ed. There may be some kids within AAP who have LDs, but the program as a whole isn't considered "special ed." Sorry.

The original mandate to even have GT (now AAP) is that it was "special education" for children who truly do learn differently. Take away the special ed part and you really don't have a reason to separate out these kids into centers.

Gifted education is special education in every sense of the word. Don't see anyone clamoring to get rid of the other end of the spectrum of special Ed and stop mainstreaming kids with autism, etc.

That's the point - if we are going to mainstream kids at one end of the spectrum, then the same should apply for those at the opposite end of the spectrum. And certainly for those who aren't at the extreme higher end, but are still in AAP. It makes no sense for these kids to be in any kind of separate educational program.

[Anonymous]

Mainstreaming kids who are struggling to stay with the class is a step up for them. Mainstreaming the AAP kids is a step down (academically speaking).

Step up for one group. Step down for the other. Not the same.

Bad argument, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AAP parent here-eliminate busing to save money. Keep it in the poorer communities who only have a few students to bus that would otherwise not be abLe to attend, but eliminate it in region 1. That would be reasonable and fair.

Sounds good to me, but please stop referring to Regions 2-5 as "the poorer communities". We've been over this before. Just say, "eliminate busing in Region 1, where it is not needed".

PP here-and if you can read, I did not refer to regions 2-5 as the "poorer communities". Talk about hypersensitivity!

I only know my own region-and mostly I was referring to Mt Vernon area and Title 1 schools if you could read between the lines.

Nope, you're being hypermyopic. If all you understand is your own neighborhood then you have no business speaking about anything outside of it. The original post either divided the county into two parts - Region 1 and everything else - or it failed to take into account a huge portion of the county. Either way it deserves to be called out as another pointless and repetitive post. If you don't like having your words interpreted in their worst light then you're the one being hypersensitive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, the pp is arguing that centers are unnecessary because 10 years ago GT students were "always" in their base schools. I pointed out this is not true.

The point is that separate education (centers) for AAP kids is unnecessary. They can be taught in their own base schools, as they used to be. It's interesting that AAP parents think their kids need to be taught separately, but that it's just fine for the kids at the opposite end of the spectrum to be fully integrated in the General Ed. classes. If it's fine for those kids, then it should be fine for the AAP kids. Right? Or are AAP kids somehow entitled to a separate educational experience?

I disagree.

You disagree with what part? That kids on the lower end of the spectrum should be included in "regular" classrooms, or that AAP kids should be? Because if we're going to push for inclusion of all kids, then why should AAP be any different? No need for a special learning environment.

I disagree with your post.

I disagree too. Dunno where you got the not-so-interesting idea that all AAP parents think its just fine for every child but their own to have the same educational experience. Try again without the straw man.

Gosh, I don't know... maybe I got that idea after hearing AAP parents demanding ad nauseum to send their kids to centers and have them in AAP-only classrooms. Just a wild guess.

Wild as in reckless and wrong. Hearing AAP parents defend their kids' rights to get the education mandated by state law has nothing to do with whether kids "at the opposite end of the spectrum" should be grouped in General Ed. Why do you keep trying to connect the two?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes they are entitled to a different experience-such is the nature of special Ed

Now this is just silly. It is a known fact that AAP is NOT special Ed. There may be some kids within AAP who have LDs, but the program as a whole isn't considered "special ed." Sorry.

The original mandate to even have GT (now AAP) is that it was "special education" for children who truly do learn differently. Take away the special ed part and you really don't have a reason to separate out these kids into centers.

Gifted education is special education in every sense of the word. Don't see anyone clamoring to get rid of the other end of the spectrum of special Ed and stop mainstreaming kids with autism, etc.

Well, in the sense of the law it isn't. So there is that.

In the sense of the law, gifted education IS a special Ed program that FCPS is required by law to provide. It doesn't have to look like current AAP, but there has to be something. Also why centers must provide busing unless there is a base school gifted option.