Surprise top-down changes to AAP center this fall . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this the new tactic after last year's push for AAP expansion/dilution met such parental resistance? A poster on the FCAG listserve notified us that at their AAP center, Forest Edge, this fall suddenly AAP is to be "integrated" with base school -- AAP classes taught by base school teachers and vice versa. Other changes as well. Parents were not consulted at all, it was just a big surprise at back to school night.

I hope the parents will not stand for this and that it will not become the new trend spreading throughout FCPS AAP. We pulled our DC out of base school because LLIV was not going to provide the same academic (AND social/emotional) support for him as a center would . . . we thought.

OMG!! AAP is to be "integrated with the base school"?? Whatever will little Larla and Xavier do, how will they learn alongside Jane and Jimmy? This just isn't right.

[Anonymous]

I seriously wish there was a FCPS that was solely for the Gen Ed population, with plenty of differentiation for anyone who might need it (in any direction). Back in the day when I was in ES (here in FCPS!), that was how it was done and there was none of this absurdity that certain parents seem to demand.

[Anonymous]

No AAP parent has said on this thread that they don't want their child spending time with non-AAP students so stop making an issue out of nothing.

If the schools are going to integrate them fully then why waste so much $$ on the AAP process? Why be so sneaky about this change?

What would the teachers actually like to see happen? What do the teachers think is best? My guess is some gen ed teachers like that AAP exists because it narrows down the broad range of abilities in their class. Teachers are not given enough training or resources to differentiate for such a big range in abilities.

[Anonymous]

AAP parent here - I'd be okay with them getting rid of AAP if EVERY teacher had an aide so the teachers could do appropriate, successful grouping by ability within their classroom. But that's never going to happen.

[Anonymous]

Somehow the Montessori kids seem to work side by side without all this segregation and turn out just fine.

[Anonymous]

There's a self-selection issue when you compare to Montessori. Certain profiles of kids tend to be the ones who choose to stay with Montessori beyond preschool or the early grades. (I'm not trying to say something negative about Montessori.)

[Anonymous]

Not necessarily. There are public schools in Arlington and DC that are Montessori and they are not always self selecting.

[Anonymous]

Well, one of the reasons people move to my little neighborhood is so their kids can go to a Montessori school so that is self-selection. Plus, you can receive a transfer to another school if the Montessori approach isn't a good fit for your child.

[Anonymous]

Montessori works because it is child-directed. The child works on what they want and the teacher guides each child differently based on their readiness. That is as far from regular public instruction as you could imagine. Regular instruction is completely teacher-driven and it is very hard to differentiate. They teach the lesson and the kids listen and react. Using Montessori as a reason against grouping in public schools is not at all persuasive or relevant.

[Anonymous]

Isn't it interesting that 90% of the posts on the "AAP" forum, at least in this thread, appear to be from disgruntled parents of children in the GE program? I thought the idea of this forum was to keep you from being offended by any mention of the program, but here you are, seeking out an opportunity to attack any parent who is genuinely interested in discussing the structure and delivery of the educational program that FCPS says is appropriate for their child and is supposed to be providing.

You all are so quick to trash the AAP program and accuse parents of trying to elevate their children at the expense of yours -- never considering that perhaps YOU are the ones who cannot tolerate the thought that another child may need a different kind of educational program -- not better, different -- and one that is promised by this public school system as appropriate for that child. Would you tell the parent of a child with a learning disability, physical challenges, or other special needs that the public school system is not the place for them, because it's not fair that anyone gets anything different from what your child receives? Your anger, snark, misunderstanding of GT education, and stubborn insistence that most posters' children could not possibly have different educational needs is really only revealing of your own ignorance and insecurities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it interesting that 90% of the posts on the "AAP" forum, at least in this thread, appear to be from disgruntled parents of children in the GE program? I thought the idea of this forum was to keep you from being offended by any mention of the program, but here you are, seeking out an opportunity to attack any parent who is genuinely interested in discussing the structure and delivery of the educational program that FCPS says is appropriate for their child and is supposed to be providing.

You all are so quick to trash the AAP program and accuse parents of trying to elevate their children at the expense of yours -- never considering that perhaps YOU are the ones who cannot tolerate the thought that another child may need a different kind of educational program -- not better, different -- and one that is promised by this public school system as appropriate for that child. Would you tell the parent of a child with a learning disability, physical challenges, or other special needs that the public school system is not the place for them, because it's not fair that anyone gets anything different from what your child receives? Your anger, snark, misunderstanding of GT education, and stubborn insistence that most posters' children could not possibly have different educational needs is really only revealing of your own ignorance and insecurities.

Is it the same one or two people every time? Seriously, who uses the term "snowflake". I think it's meant to be snarky, but instead makes me feel embarrassed for the person who uses it. Anyways, unfortunately, every single time they chime in with their same old song, we unfortunately take the bait.

[Anonymous]

Thank you PP. I agree totally. I am tired of people telling me how my children would be 'just fine' in a regular classroom. They wouldn't and they weren't.

Everytime I read the work 'snowflake' I just hear such bitterness in people. Spend some time on your own DC and stop tearing down the needs of others.

[Anonymous]

Can OP explain exactly how the classes are going to be integrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really see any problem if the AAP and non-AAP kids are mixed together for PE, Music, Art - so what?
They should be separated for English, Math, History, Science because those are the subjects in which academically advanced kids will most benefir from being with others like themselves, no?

I agree. I have a child in a center and I hate that until this year, DC was separated from the Gen Ed kids. It seemed to feed into the hatred that the base school Gen Ed parents have for the AAP parents. I like that they seem to be (from what I can tell from DC) mixing them for some specials. They should do that.

An absurd statement on its face -- since often these are the same parents. I had kids in both AAP and gen. ed. and it didn't turn me against myself. But if I can speak for the Gen Ed. me I'd say that what parents hate are kids who aren't any smarter than theirs being given special instruction and elevated academic status. It's not what AAP was designed for, it's not equitable and it's not right. Period.

Exactly. And so many parents feel this way, I can't believe FCPS hasn't gotten a clue yet and changed the criteria for AAP placement to include only the profoundly gifted, those who cannot be educated in a Gen Ed classroom. The parents who are up in arms whenever somebody states this are those who know their child doesn't fit that criteria and so wouldn't be in AAP if the test scores and other criteria necessary for admission were raised.

If you ask parents of highly and profoundly gifted, they are happy with a larger group of students in the AAP class, and do not want a tiny, exclusive class of a dozen or so kids.

I say this as a parent of one of those kids you seem so concerned about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it interesting that 90% of the posts on the "AAP" forum, at least in this thread, appear to be from disgruntled parents of children in the GE program? I thought the idea of this forum was to keep you from being offended by any mention of the program, but here you are, seeking out an opportunity to attack any parent who is genuinely interested in discussing the structure and delivery of the educational program that FCPS says is appropriate for their child and is supposed to be providing.

You all are so quick to trash the AAP program and accuse parents of trying to elevate their children at the expense of yours -- never considering that perhaps YOU are the ones who cannot tolerate the thought that another child may need a different kind of educational program -- not better, different -- and one that is promised by this public school system as appropriate for that child. Would you tell the parent of a child with a learning disability, physical challenges, or other special needs that the public school system is not the place for them, because it's not fair that anyone gets anything different from what your child receives? Your anger, snark, misunderstanding of GT education, and stubborn insistence that most posters' children could not possibly have different educational needs is really only revealing of your own ignorance and insecurities.

I think it's already been stated, ad nauseum, that most of us are absolutely in favor of classes for special needs children, at both ends of the spectrum. Are the majority of AAP kids "special needs" or just average/slightly above average kids?