So you are King of FCPS AAP for a day . . .

[Anonymous]

Go back to 1980s tracking: smart kids in one class, the next smartest, and the slowest all together. Made so much more sense.

Let's put the parents into these subgroups:
Idiots who annoy the teachers constantly
Idiots who fight for their average kids to be in AAP
Great parents who accept the system's decisions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Go back to 1980s tracking: smart kids in one class, the next smartest, and the slowest all together. Made so much more sense.

Let's put the parents into these subgroups:
Idiots who annoy the teachers constantly
Idiots who fight for their average kids to be in AAP
Great parents who accept the system's decisions

I take it you would be in the idiot category?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't change AAP. I don't see that as the problem. I would change Gen Ed. The lack of differentiation required by teachers in Gen Ed leads to alot of the discontent with that program. AAP is the resource for the advanced. Spec Ed is the resource for those learners. The county teaches the in between 70% as if they are 1 homogeneous group. Differentiation is what makes AAP a good program and that should be required for Gen Ed too.

I agree. Differentiation seems to be working well in mathematics in elementary school. Why not do something similar in the three other core subject areas?

[Anonymous]

I really wish they would allow kids to move at their own pace through the work. Our kids are in AAP and they were so bored with the K-2 math and asked to work ahead in their multi-grade classrooms but weren't allowed.

If they would just figure out a way for kids to move through math and language arts at their own pace, I'd be thrilled - kind of like the old one-room school house. Each school could have specific periods designated for math and LA and 7 teachers teaching that subject at the same time. Each class would have benchmarks and kids work at their own pace with the teacher acting as a tutor. If a kid could get through the materials in 4 months, they would move on up. The goal would be to have kids move through at least 1 "grade" a year but the faster paced students could move ahead.

I know there would be some hurdles - like what to do with the kids ready for high school by upper elementary but that probably wouldn't be the majority.

[Anonymous]

I would go back and enroll myself in school. My mom knew nothing about AAP and I ended up in MIT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would go back and enroll myself in school. My mom knew nothing about AAP and I ended up in MIT.

Good for you. So what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Go back to 1980s tracking: smart kids in one class, the next smartest, and the slowest all together. Made so much more sense.

Let's put the parents into these subgroups:
Idiots who annoy the teachers constantly
Idiots who fight for their average kids to be in AAP
Great parents who accept the system's decisions


[list]LOVE IT!!

[Anonymous]

I would eliminate appeals completely

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would eliminate appeals completely

Why? Because your kid got in so you automatically assume he or she is better than another kid with a slightly lower score ( or perhaps the same scores but in different areas on the test)?I agree that appeals are probably overused, but blame FCPS from not denying the ones they should deny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would eliminate appeals completely

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't change AAP. I don't see that as the problem. I would change Gen Ed. The lack of differentiation required by teachers in Gen Ed leads to alot of the discontent with that program. AAP is the resource for the advanced. Spec Ed is the resource for those learners. The county teaches the in between 70% as if they are 1 homogeneous group. Differentiation is what makes AAP a good program and that should be required for Gen Ed too.

I agree. Differentiation seems to be working well in mathematics in elementary school. Why not do something similar in the three other core subject areas?

[list]OK then differentiate with ALL kids in their home schools up to the AAP center level (or higher) in all subjects!! This way, ALL kids, could move into AAP classes when ready and those who are in AAP level but need help in a certain subject could move out. This is a no-brainer. Why is FCPS fighting this. It could work, be successful, provide an excellent education for ALL students by allowing them to reach their full potential at any given time/grade/age. Not to mention those kids who are "not cutting the mustard" in a given subject, in AAP, could get what they need as well. Set a baseline academic level and move kids in and out of advanced classes based on their academic performance. This is how the advanced mathmatics works now, if you have bad grades on 2-3(?) tests you are moved down a math level until you master the topic. Why can't this be done across the board in all subjects, at all levels, at all schools? The teachers are already differentiating for at least 3 levels with in their classrooms so differentiate for at least 3 levels in the "top class" as well.

The AAP center is so removed that high level learners in GE do not have an option to reach higher. Unless, of course, they are deemed "eligible" by a special board, during a select time of year and move out of their base school. An exhausting process much like "government red tape" and quite frankly a waste of time and resourses.

Why is FCPS deciding in 2nd grade that a select few children are "out of the box thinkers" and worthy of a better education and advanced course work for the rest of their primary education? This is wrong. Most FCPS students could be successful with the AAP center curriculum so why are only a select few receiving it? I am not speaking for the "genius" level students (about 1%) they need a select level of learning. I am talking about the vast majority of the AAP center kids who are smart but not in need of a separate school and are not in need of "automatic" advanced placement. What ever happened to earning your "grade" to be in advanced placement? Placing a child in an "advanced" curriculum in 2nd grade is, of course, going to give them an advantage in later years. But the AAP center as it is now is so biased, discriminatory, and not affording many smart kids, who are not in the center, the same opportunity at a better education. FCPS LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD! I swear this is grounds for a lawsuit waiting to happen.

[Anonymous]

Separate gifted education is evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Separate gifted education is evil.

[list] Yes it is!

[Anonymous]

The AAP center is so removed that high level learners in GE do not have an option to reach higher. Unless, of course, they are deemed "eligible" by a special board, during a select time of year and move out of their base school. An exhausting process much like "government red tape" and quite frankly a waste of time and resourses.

Why is FCPS deciding in 2nd grade that a select few children are "out of the box thinkers" and worthy of a better education and advanced course work for the rest of their primary education? This is wrong. Most FCPS students could be successful with the AAP center curriculum so why are only a select few receiving it? I am not speaking for the "genius" level students (about 1%) they need a select level of learning. I am talking about the vast majority of the AAP center kids who are smart but not in need of a separate school and are not in need of "automatic" advanced placement. What ever happened to earning your "grade" to be in advanced placement? Placing a child in an "advanced" curriculum in 2nd grade is, of course, going to give them an advantage in later years. But the AAP center as it is now is so biased, discriminatory, and not affording many smart kids, who are not in the center, the same opportunity at a better education. FCPS LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD! I swear this is grounds for a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Couldn't agree more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The AAP center is so removed that high level learners in GE do not have an option to reach higher. Unless, of course, they are deemed "eligible" by a special board, during a select time of year and move out of their base school. An exhausting process much like "government red tape" and quite frankly a waste of time and resourses.

Why is FCPS deciding in 2nd grade that a select few children are "out of the box thinkers" and worthy of a better education and advanced course work for the rest of their primary education? This is wrong. Most FCPS students could be successful with the AAP center curriculum so why are only a select few receiving it? I am not speaking for the "genius" level students (about 1%) they need a select level of learning. I am talking about the vast majority of the AAP center kids who are smart but not in need of a separate school and are not in need of "automatic" advanced placement. What ever happened to earning your "grade" to be in advanced placement? Placing a child in an "advanced" curriculum in 2nd grade is, of course, going to give them an advantage in later years. But the AAP center as it is now is so biased, discriminatory, and not affording many smart kids, who are not in the center, the same opportunity at a better education. FCPS LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD! I swear this is grounds for a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Couldn't agree more.

I disagree. Parents are free to refer their child in any year up to 8th grade. How is that grounds for a lawsuit? If there were grounds for a suit, it would be from historically underrepresented groups who may not be able to afford private testing, not middle class Caucasians. And since the Young Scholars program is intended to identify students from underrepresented populations, I still don't see what the grounds for a lawsuit would be.