What do we think about this new HOPE scale?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is— none of that indicates whether a kid needs full time AAP or is going to be successful in Advanced Math. It’s not Advanced Compassion or Advanced Visual Arts.

It’s great to recognize that our kids have strengths in all kinds of areas and that they all have value. But why would you use this type of data to accelerate a child in the four main academic subjects?

Teachers cant force math or science into low performing student's head. But equity requires that everyone be called advanced, so new namesake categories that are non-math or non-science or non-english have to be created, so that students who are failing in math, science, and english, can be put into those and called advanced too. So everyone is advanced. Equity is achieved.

Schools no longer can teach, they are forced to come up with BS to make everyone feel equal, whether they study or not.

Sounds kind of Orwellian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether AAP exists or not or whether centers are an option or not. I just want a system where kids who are above grade level in a subject can receive above grade level instruction in that subject.

AAP doesn't seem to work correctly in that manner, since a lot of kids who are above grade level aren't being admitted, and a lot of kids, even from the same school, who are on or below grade level are being admitted.

The HOPE scale seems like more proof that FCPS can't decide whether AAP is a gifted program, an above grade level instructional program, or a talent development program. It's trying to wear all 3 hats and is doing it quite poorly.

A lot of kids = a handful

I don't know exactly how it works now but before they changed everything, most kids were where you would expect them to be, the smart/bright/gifted kids in AAP and the regular kids in gen ed. It's only on DCUM where the gifted kids all get left out and the undeserving are admitted.

Wrong. Back in the day, when test scores mattered the most, your viewpoint would be correct. Now, when GBRS is 4 times more important than any test score, the above grade level kids with high cogats who are viewed by their second grade teacher as quite academically advanced but not especially creative or motivated don't get admitted to AAP.

The HOPE scale looks like a big improvement in this respect, since there are more academic categories and fewer fluff categories.

I appreciate that everyone dislikes standardized testing and I appreciate that standardized testing has its problems, but I still have yet to see a better system for evaluating students. In other words, standardized testing is like capitalism - there are a lot of bad incentives that it creates but it's the best of a bad bunch.

Introducing all these other factors (e.g., HOPE/GBRS), while well-intentioned, is muddying the waters. It is breeding resentment and suspicion and creating the conditions for a backlash, as the evaluation process becomes more and more indecipherable. At this point, no one can say with any certainty what the criteria are for getting admitted to AAP and so you have these long, convoluted discussion forums where frankly no one really knows anything. On top of that, the evaluation process is cloaked in so many committees and processes (e.g., school committee, centralized committee) so that no one can be held accountable.

I think everyone would be better off with having a simple and straightforward admissions process where anyone can get in, so long as they meet some objective, minimum standard. Having an objective, minimum standard will allow for anyone to get in, if they put in some effort. I know some will complain that that will water down AAP, which is a fair and correct criticism. However, AAP is already being watered down through this indecipherable evaluation process, so I don't think this really changes things. This also has the benefit of eliminating the anxiety and resentment of this admissions process and eliminating unnecessary workloads for teachers and administrators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether AAP exists or not or whether centers are an option or not. I just want a system where kids who are above grade level in a subject can receive above grade level instruction in that subject.

AAP doesn't seem to work correctly in that manner, since a lot of kids who are above grade level aren't being admitted, and a lot of kids, even from the same school, who are on or below grade level are being admitted.

The HOPE scale seems like more proof that FCPS can't decide whether AAP is a gifted program, an above grade level instructional program, or a talent development program. It's trying to wear all 3 hats and is doing it quite poorly.

A lot of kids = a handful

I don't know exactly how it works now but before they changed everything, most kids were where you would expect them to be, the smart/bright/gifted kids in AAP and the regular kids in gen ed. It's only on DCUM where the gifted kids all get left out and the undeserving are admitted.

Wrong. Back in the day, when test scores mattered the most, your viewpoint would be correct. Now, when GBRS is 4 times more important than any test score, the above grade level kids with high cogats who are viewed by their second grade teacher as quite academically advanced but not especially creative or motivated don't get admitted to AAP.

The HOPE scale looks like a big improvement in this respect, since there are more academic categories and fewer fluff categories.

I appreciate that everyone dislikes standardized testing and I appreciate that standardized testing has its problems, but I still have yet to see a better system for evaluating students. In other words, standardized testing is like capitalism - there are a lot of bad incentives that it creates but it's the best of a bad bunch.

Introducing all these other factors (e.g., HOPE/GBRS), while well-intentioned, is muddying the waters. It is breeding resentment and suspicion and creating the conditions for a backlash, as the evaluation process becomes more and more indecipherable. At this point, no one can say with any certainty what the criteria are for getting admitted to AAP and so you have these long, convoluted discussion forums where frankly no one really knows anything. On top of that, the evaluation process is cloaked in so many committees and processes (e.g., school committee, centralized committee) so that no one can be held accountable.

I think everyone would be better off with having a simple and straightforward admissions process where anyone can get in, so long as they meet some objective, minimum standard. Having an objective, minimum standard will allow for anyone to get in, if they put in some effort. I know some will complain that that will water down AAP, which is a fair and correct criticism. However, AAP is already being watered down through this indecipherable evaluation process, so I don't think this really changes things. This also has the benefit of eliminating the anxiety and resentment of this admissions process and eliminating unnecessary workloads for teachers and administrators.

Very much agree with this. Just make the process simple and transparent. Additionally, get rid of the complicated center AAP program and make local level 4 AAP be available at all elementary schools. This further simplifies things for parents and students because it makes it easier for kids to switch in and/or out of an aap class if the teacher observes they are not doing well or not a good fit. This all or nothing attitude, i.e you either don't get in, or you're in through the end of middle school, is quite ridiculous and introduces many superficial areas of focus for both teachers and students/parents, cutting valuable time that could be used for learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether AAP exists or not or whether centers are an option or not. I just want a system where kids who are above grade level in a subject can receive above grade level instruction in that subject.

AAP doesn't seem to work correctly in that manner, since a lot of kids who are above grade level aren't being admitted, and a lot of kids, even from the same school, who are on or below grade level are being admitted.

The HOPE scale seems like more proof that FCPS can't decide whether AAP is a gifted program, an above grade level instructional program, or a talent development program. It's trying to wear all 3 hats and is doing it quite poorly.

A lot of kids = a handful

I don't know exactly how it works now but before they changed everything, most kids were where you would expect them to be, the smart/bright/gifted kids in AAP and the regular kids in gen ed. It's only on DCUM where the gifted kids all get left out and the undeserving are admitted.

Wrong. Back in the day, when test scores mattered the most, your viewpoint would be correct. Now, when GBRS is 4 times more important than any test score, the above grade level kids with high cogats who are viewed by their second grade teacher as quite academically advanced but not especially creative or motivated don't get admitted to AAP.

The HOPE scale looks like a big improvement in this respect, since there are more academic categories and fewer fluff categories.

I appreciate that everyone dislikes standardized testing and I appreciate that standardized testing has its problems, but I still have yet to see a better system for evaluating students. In other words, standardized testing is like capitalism - there are a lot of bad incentives that it creates but it's the best of a bad bunch.

Introducing all these other factors (e.g., HOPE/GBRS), while well-intentioned, is muddying the waters. It is breeding resentment and suspicion and creating the conditions for a backlash, as the evaluation process becomes more and more indecipherable. At this point, no one can say with any certainty what the criteria are for getting admitted to AAP and so you have these long, convoluted discussion forums where frankly no one really knows anything. On top of that, the evaluation process is cloaked in so many committees and processes (e.g., school committee, centralized committee) so that no one can be held accountable.

I think everyone would be better off with having a simple and straightforward admissions process where anyone can get in, so long as they meet some objective, minimum standard. Having an objective, minimum standard will allow for anyone to get in, if they put in some effort. I know some will complain that that will water down AAP, which is a fair and correct criticism. However, AAP is already being watered down through this indecipherable evaluation process, so I don't think this really changes things. This also has the benefit of eliminating the anxiety and resentment of this admissions process and eliminating unnecessary workloads for teachers and administrators.

Very much agree with this. Just make the process simple and transparent. Additionally, get rid of the complicated center AAP program and make local level 4 AAP be available at all elementary schools. This further simplifies things for parents and students because it makes it easier for kids to switch in and/or out of an aap class if the teacher observes they are not doing well or not a good fit. This all or nothing attitude, i.e you either don't get in, or you're in through the end of middle school, is quite ridiculous and introduces many superficial areas of focus for both teachers and students/parents, cutting valuable time that could be used for learning.

The AAP cohort was life-changing for one of my DC's and good for the other. Why do you want to take that away from other kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether AAP exists or not or whether centers are an option or not. I just want a system where kids who are above grade level in a subject can receive above grade level instruction in that subject.

AAP doesn't seem to work correctly in that manner, since a lot of kids who are above grade level aren't being admitted, and a lot of kids, even from the same school, who are on or below grade level are being admitted.

The HOPE scale seems like more proof that FCPS can't decide whether AAP is a gifted program, an above grade level instructional program, or a talent development program. It's trying to wear all 3 hats and is doing it quite poorly.

A lot of kids = a handful

I don't know exactly how it works now but before they changed everything, most kids were where you would expect them to be, the smart/bright/gifted kids in AAP and the regular kids in gen ed. It's only on DCUM where the gifted kids all get left out and the undeserving are admitted.

Wrong. Back in the day, when test scores mattered the most, your viewpoint would be correct. Now, when GBRS is 4 times more important than any test score, the above grade level kids with high cogats who are viewed by their second grade teacher as quite academically advanced but not especially creative or motivated don't get admitted to AAP.

The HOPE scale looks like a big improvement in this respect, since there are more academic categories and fewer fluff categories.

I appreciate that everyone dislikes standardized testing and I appreciate that standardized testing has its problems, but I still have yet to see a better system for evaluating students. In other words, standardized testing is like capitalism - there are a lot of bad incentives that it creates but it's the best of a bad bunch.

Introducing all these other factors (e.g., HOPE/GBRS), while well-intentioned, is muddying the waters. It is breeding resentment and suspicion and creating the conditions for a backlash, as the evaluation process becomes more and more indecipherable. At this point, no one can say with any certainty what the criteria are for getting admitted to AAP and so you have these long, convoluted discussion forums where frankly no one really knows anything. On top of that, the evaluation process is cloaked in so many committees and processes (e.g., school committee, centralized committee) so that no one can be held accountable.

I think everyone would be better off with having a simple and straightforward admissions process where anyone can get in, so long as they meet some objective, minimum standard. Having an objective, minimum standard will allow for anyone to get in, if they put in some effort. I know some will complain that that will water down AAP, which is a fair and correct criticism. However, AAP is already being watered down through this indecipherable evaluation process, so I don't think this really changes things. This also has the benefit of eliminating the anxiety and resentment of this admissions process and eliminating unnecessary workloads for teachers and administrators.

Very much agree with this. Just make the process simple and transparent. Additionally, get rid of the complicated center AAP program and make local level 4 AAP be available at all elementary schools. This further simplifies things for parents and students because it makes it easier for kids to switch in and/or out of an aap class if the teacher observes they are not doing well or not a good fit. This all or nothing attitude, i.e you either don't get in, or you're in through the end of middle school, is quite ridiculous and introduces many superficial areas of focus for both teachers and students/parents, cutting valuable time that could be used for learning.

The AAP cohort was life-changing for one of my DC's and good for the other. Why do you want to take that away from other kids?

Being among a cohort of slightly above average kids was "life-changing" for your kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Title says it all

Had no idea what this was until AART mentioned it

Do you normally crowdsource your opinions? WTF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether AAP exists or not or whether centers are an option or not. I just want a system where kids who are above grade level in a subject can receive above grade level instruction in that subject.

AAP doesn't seem to work correctly in that manner, since a lot of kids who are above grade level aren't being admitted, and a lot of kids, even from the same school, who are on or below grade level are being admitted.

The HOPE scale seems like more proof that FCPS can't decide whether AAP is a gifted program, an above grade level instructional program, or a talent development program. It's trying to wear all 3 hats and is doing it quite poorly.

A lot of kids = a handful

I don't know exactly how it works now but before they changed everything, most kids were where you would expect them to be, the smart/bright/gifted kids in AAP and the regular kids in gen ed. It's only on DCUM where the gifted kids all get left out and the undeserving are admitted.

Wrong. Back in the day, when test scores mattered the most, your viewpoint would be correct. Now, when GBRS is 4 times more important than any test score, the above grade level kids with high cogats who are viewed by their second grade teacher as quite academically advanced but not especially creative or motivated don't get admitted to AAP.

The HOPE scale looks like a big improvement in this respect, since there are more academic categories and fewer fluff categories.

I appreciate that everyone dislikes standardized testing and I appreciate that standardized testing has its problems, but I still have yet to see a better system for evaluating students. In other words, standardized testing is like capitalism - there are a lot of bad incentives that it creates but it's the best of a bad bunch.

Introducing all these other factors (e.g., HOPE/GBRS), while well-intentioned, is muddying the waters. It is breeding resentment and suspicion and creating the conditions for a backlash, as the evaluation process becomes more and more indecipherable. At this point, no one can say with any certainty what the criteria are for getting admitted to AAP and so you have these long, convoluted discussion forums where frankly no one really knows anything. On top of that, the evaluation process is cloaked in so many committees and processes (e.g., school committee, centralized committee) so that no one can be held accountable.

I think everyone would be better off with having a simple and straightforward admissions process where anyone can get in, so long as they meet some objective, minimum standard. Having an objective, minimum standard will allow for anyone to get in, if they put in some effort. I know some will complain that that will water down AAP, which is a fair and correct criticism. However, AAP is already being watered down through this indecipherable evaluation process, so I don't think this really changes things. This also has the benefit of eliminating the anxiety and resentment of this admissions process and eliminating unnecessary workloads for teachers and administrators.

Very much agree with this. Just make the process simple and transparent. Additionally, get rid of the complicated center AAP program and make local level 4 AAP be available at all elementary schools. This further simplifies things for parents and students because it makes it easier for kids to switch in and/or out of an aap class if the teacher observes they are not doing well or not a good fit. This all or nothing attitude, i.e you either don't get in, or you're in through the end of middle school, is quite ridiculous and introduces many superficial areas of focus for both teachers and students/parents, cutting valuable time that could be used for learning.

The AAP cohort was life-changing for one of my DC's and good for the other. Why do you want to take that away from other kids?

Being among a cohort of slightly above average kids was "life-changing" for your kid?

So because you think my DS is lame, that's why you want to take that away from other kids. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether AAP exists or not or whether centers are an option or not. I just want a system where kids who are above grade level in a subject can receive above grade level instruction in that subject.

AAP doesn't seem to work correctly in that manner, since a lot of kids who are above grade level aren't being admitted, and a lot of kids, even from the same school, who are on or below grade level are being admitted.

The HOPE scale seems like more proof that FCPS can't decide whether AAP is a gifted program, an above grade level instructional program, or a talent development program. It's trying to wear all 3 hats and is doing it quite poorly.

A lot of kids = a handful

I don't know exactly how it works now but before they changed everything, most kids were where you would expect them to be, the smart/bright/gifted kids in AAP and the regular kids in gen ed. It's only on DCUM where the gifted kids all get left out and the undeserving are admitted.

Wrong. Back in the day, when test scores mattered the most, your viewpoint would be correct. Now, when GBRS is 4 times more important than any test score, the above grade level kids with high cogats who are viewed by their second grade teacher as quite academically advanced but not especially creative or motivated don't get admitted to AAP.

The HOPE scale looks like a big improvement in this respect, since there are more academic categories and fewer fluff categories.

I appreciate that everyone dislikes standardized testing and I appreciate that standardized testing has its problems, but I still have yet to see a better system for evaluating students. In other words, standardized testing is like capitalism - there are a lot of bad incentives that it creates but it's the best of a bad bunch.

Introducing all these other factors (e.g., HOPE/GBRS), while well-intentioned, is muddying the waters. It is breeding resentment and suspicion and creating the conditions for a backlash, as the evaluation process becomes more and more indecipherable. At this point, no one can say with any certainty what the criteria are for getting admitted to AAP and so you have these long, convoluted discussion forums where frankly no one really knows anything. On top of that, the evaluation process is cloaked in so many committees and processes (e.g., school committee, centralized committee) so that no one can be held accountable.

I think everyone would be better off with having a simple and straightforward admissions process where anyone can get in, so long as they meet some objective, minimum standard. Having an objective, minimum standard will allow for anyone to get in, if they put in some effort. I know some will complain that that will water down AAP, which is a fair and correct criticism. However, AAP is already being watered down through this indecipherable evaluation process, so I don't think this really changes things. This also has the benefit of eliminating the anxiety and resentment of this admissions process and eliminating unnecessary workloads for teachers and administrators.

Very much agree with this. Just make the process simple and transparent. Additionally, get rid of the complicated center AAP program and make local level 4 AAP be available at all elementary schools. This further simplifies things for parents and students because it makes it easier for kids to switch in and/or out of an aap class if the teacher observes they are not doing well or not a good fit. This all or nothing attitude, i.e you either don't get in, or you're in through the end of middle school, is quite ridiculous and introduces many superficial areas of focus for both teachers and students/parents, cutting valuable time that could be used for learning.

The AAP cohort was life-changing for one of my DC's and good for the other. Why do you want to take that away from other kids?

Being among a cohort of slightly above average kids was "life-changing" for your kid?

So because you think my DS is lame, that's why you want to take that away from other kids. Got it.

I don't want to take acceleration away from anyone. I want it to be restructured in a way that makes sense and serves a greater purpose than allowing UMC slightly above average kids to feel special. Kids who are not above grade level in language arts do not belong in AAP language arts. Kids who are not above grade level in math do not belong in AAP or advanced math. Kids who are only one year above grade level generally could have their needs met by switching classrooms at their base school. AAP centers should be reserved for the kids who legitimately can't have their needs met at their base school.

[Anonymous]

The superintendent/state's long term goal is to have every single child take algebra by 8th grade (as a HS math teacher, I'm crying inside over this). So either a) Two arms of FCPS aren't talking to each other at all (likely) or b) The goal is to get as many kids as possible into accelerated math so that they take prealgebra in 7th grade (also likely). I predict AAP enrollment spikes going forward.

[Anonymous]

Isn't that why they changed the name from gifted to AAP? So they could focus on academic advancement and not other advancement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't that why they changed the name from gifted to AAP? So they could focus on academic advancement and not other advancement?

No, it was so that they could include (they already were including these kids) high-achieving-but-not-gifted kids too. The GT program was specifically an academic program, not for gifted in the arts or gifted in some other on-academic area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The superintendent/state's long term goal is to have every single child take algebra by 8th grade (as a HS math teacher, I'm crying inside over this). So either a) Two arms of FCPS aren't talking to each other at all (likely) or b) The goal is to get as many kids as possible into accelerated math so that they take prealgebra in 7th grade (also likely). I predict AAP enrollment spikes going forward.

superintendent is just an equity puppet. Goal of equity is to make sure no one goes beyond algebra by senior year. That way everyone is equal. Equity in action!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Very much agree with this. Just make the process simple and transparent. Additionally, get rid of the complicated center AAP program and make local level 4 AAP be available at all elementary schools. This further simplifies things for parents and students because it makes it easier for kids to switch in and/or out of an aap class if the teacher observes they are not doing well or not a good fit. This all or nothing attitude, i.e you either don't get in, or you're in through the end of middle school, is quite ridiculous and introduces many superficial areas of focus for both teachers and students/parents, cutting valuable time that could be used for learning.

But the optics of physical proximity of two classrooms one for level 4 aap and other for gen ed would be a problem, especially with equity looneys walking around with a racial lens. They'll walk into the advanced level 4 math class and take a count of students by race, and pull out the race card when majority of students in their view are the wrong kind of minority. Right next door, would be the gen ed class filled with kids who they claim are forcefully being kept out of advanced class next door. To reiterate the racial case, they draw parallels to decades old photos of separate water fountains placed next to each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether AAP exists or not or whether centers are an option or not. I just want a system where kids who are above grade level in a subject can receive above grade level instruction in that subject.

AAP doesn't seem to work correctly in that manner, since a lot of kids who are above grade level aren't being admitted, and a lot of kids, even from the same school, who are on or below grade level are being admitted.

The HOPE scale seems like more proof that FCPS can't decide whether AAP is a gifted program, an above grade level instructional program, or a talent development program. It's trying to wear all 3 hats and is doing it quite poorly.

A lot of kids = a handful

I don't know exactly how it works now but before they changed everything, most kids were where you would expect them to be, the smart/bright/gifted kids in AAP and the regular kids in gen ed. It's only on DCUM where the gifted kids all get left out and the undeserving are admitted.

Wrong. Back in the day, when test scores mattered the most, your viewpoint would be correct. Now, when GBRS is 4 times more important than any test score, the above grade level kids with high cogats who are viewed by their second grade teacher as quite academically advanced but not especially creative or motivated don't get admitted to AAP.

The HOPE scale looks like a big improvement in this respect, since there are more academic categories and fewer fluff categories.

I appreciate that everyone dislikes standardized testing and I appreciate that standardized testing has its problems, but I still have yet to see a better system for evaluating students. In other words, standardized testing is like capitalism - there are a lot of bad incentives that it creates but it's the best of a bad bunch.

Introducing all these other factors (e.g., HOPE/GBRS), while well-intentioned, is muddying the waters. It is breeding resentment and suspicion and creating the conditions for a backlash, as the evaluation process becomes more and more indecipherable. At this point, no one can say with any certainty what the criteria are for getting admitted to AAP and so you have these long, convoluted discussion forums where frankly no one really knows anything. On top of that, the evaluation process is cloaked in so many committees and processes (e.g., school committee, centralized committee) so that no one can be held accountable.

I think everyone would be better off with having a simple and straightforward admissions process where anyone can get in, so long as they meet some objective, minimum standard. Having an objective, minimum standard will allow for anyone to get in, if they put in some effort. I know some will complain that that will water down AAP, which is a fair and correct criticism. However, AAP is already being watered down through this indecipherable evaluation process, so I don't think this really changes things. This also has the benefit of eliminating the anxiety and resentment of this admissions process and eliminating unnecessary workloads for teachers and administrators.

Very much agree with this. Just make the process simple and transparent. Additionally, get rid of the complicated center AAP program and make local level 4 AAP be available at all elementary schools. This further simplifies things for parents and students because it makes it easier for kids to switch in and/or out of an aap class if the teacher observes they are not doing well or not a good fit. This all or nothing attitude, i.e you either don't get in, or you're in through the end of middle school, is quite ridiculous and introduces many superficial areas of focus for both teachers and students/parents, cutting valuable time that could be used for learning.

The AAP cohort was life-changing for one of my DC's and good for the other. Why do you want to take that away from other kids?

The current school board wants to take away AAP in order to close the racial achievement gap from the top down.

It is easier to take away opportunities for advanced learners than to raise up the kids who underperform academiy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about whether AAP exists or not or whether centers are an option or not. I just want a system where kids who are above grade level in a subject can receive above grade level instruction in that subject.

AAP doesn't seem to work correctly in that manner, since a lot of kids who are above grade level aren't being admitted, and a lot of kids, even from the same school, who are on or below grade level are being admitted.

The HOPE scale seems like more proof that FCPS can't decide whether AAP is a gifted program, an above grade level instructional program, or a talent development program. It's trying to wear all 3 hats and is doing it quite poorly.

A lot of kids = a handful

I don't know exactly how it works now but before they changed everything, most kids were where you would expect them to be, the smart/bright/gifted kids in AAP and the regular kids in gen ed. It's only on DCUM where the gifted kids all get left out and the undeserving are admitted.

Wrong. Back in the day, when test scores mattered the most, your viewpoint would be correct. Now, when GBRS is 4 times more important than any test score, the above grade level kids with high cogats who are viewed by their second grade teacher as quite academically advanced but not especially creative or motivated don't get admitted to AAP.

The HOPE scale looks like a big improvement in this respect, since there are more academic categories and fewer fluff categories.

I appreciate that everyone dislikes standardized testing and I appreciate that standardized testing has its problems, but I still have yet to see a better system for evaluating students. In other words, standardized testing is like capitalism - there are a lot of bad incentives that it creates but it's the best of a bad bunch.

Introducing all these other factors (e.g., HOPE/GBRS), while well-intentioned, is muddying the waters. It is breeding resentment and suspicion and creating the conditions for a backlash, as the evaluation process becomes more and more indecipherable. At this point, no one can say with any certainty what the criteria are for getting admitted to AAP and so you have these long, convoluted discussion forums where frankly no one really knows anything. On top of that, the evaluation process is cloaked in so many committees and processes (e.g., school committee, centralized committee) so that no one can be held accountable.

I think everyone would be better off with having a simple and straightforward admissions process where anyone can get in, so long as they meet some objective, minimum standard. Having an objective, minimum standard will allow for anyone to get in, if they put in some effort. I know some will complain that that will water down AAP, which is a fair and correct criticism. However, AAP is already being watered down through this indecipherable evaluation process, so I don't think this really changes things. This also has the benefit of eliminating the anxiety and resentment of this admissions process and eliminating unnecessary workloads for teachers and administrators.

Very much agree with this. Just make the process simple and transparent. Additionally, get rid of the complicated center AAP program and make local level 4 AAP be available at all elementary schools. This further simplifies things for parents and students because it makes it easier for kids to switch in and/or out of an aap class if the teacher observes they are not doing well or not a good fit. This all or nothing attitude, i.e you either don't get in, or you're in through the end of middle school, is quite ridiculous and introduces many superficial areas of focus for both teachers and students/parents, cutting valuable time that could be used for learning.

The AAP cohort was life-changing for one of my DC's and good for the other. Why do you want to take that away from other kids?

The current school board wants to take away AAP in order to close the racial achievement gap from the top down.

It is easier to take away opportunities for advanced learners than to raise up the kids who underperform academiy.

Dumbing down education is such a losing strategy. The rest of the world, especially our fiercest economic competitors, is laughing at us. We're already behind on international education test scales. No more best and brightest: this is our future we're sacrificing. And for what? It's far more racist to concede that we have to dumb down education for URM to "catch up," than it would be to hold everyone to an objective standard and include those kids of all races and socioeconomic backgrounds who make the cut.