Neglected gifted child

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP costs are minimal...last time they broke it out, the total cost was a few hundred K, and only for busing to the center school vs the base school.

That's bs. Take a look at the budget. Transportation alone is in the millions for AAP.

+1
And if we're talking about cutting something from the already depleted budget, we need to start somewhere. Getting rid of AAP is a great place to start.

I would get rid of AAP in Cluster 1 as all of the schools have enough students to have Local Level IV.

YES. But even beyond that, I would get rid of AAP altogether or at least reform it so that it encompasses only the very highly gifted.

There are plans to broaden Local Level IV in certain parts of the county. There are also plans to expand the number of full-time AARTs. Not sure if that will save any money, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most of the AAP students would be bused anyway so the cited amount is a gross value vs. a net.

False analysis. AAP routes take the kids further from their local schools and require additional buses and drivers. The local buses are already in their neighborhoods. And, you totally forget that many would be walkers.

At the two AAP Centers my kids have attended, they joined bus routes that were already in place to the Center schools. There were no additional buses necessary.

But many, if not most, AAP kids are from out of boundary and need special bus routes to get them to the center. It's ridiculous and a huge waste of funds. Parents should be responsible for driving their kids if they aren't within boundary for the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP costs are minimal...last time they broke it out, the total cost was a few hundred K, and only for busing to the center school vs the base school.

That's bs. Take a look at the budget. Transportation alone is in the millions for AAP.

+1
And if we're talking about cutting something from the already depleted budget, we need to start somewhere. Getting rid of AAP is a great place to start.

I would get rid of AAP in Cluster 1 as all of the schools have enough students to have Local Level IV.

YES. But even beyond that, I would get rid of AAP altogether or at least reform it so that it encompasses only the very highly gifted.

There are plans to broaden Local Level IV in certain parts of the county. There are also plans to expand the number of full-time AARTs. Not sure if that will save any money, though.

Good grief, isn't AAP broad enough? It has become such a silly, wasteful program.

[Anonymous]

Do any of you have thoughts or responses to Op's article? Or you just want to spout your opinions (educated or not) on AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cut AAP completely before you cut music and languages. Jesus. Priorities, people.

Seriously! It amazes me that people are so quick to say "cut music". I imagine these same people will be horrified when the middle and high school music programs are non-existent due to the lack of an early foundation. Or when symphonies or other performance venues begin to die out. I for one value the well-rounded education FCPS provides. I have 3 children, the oldest of whom is in 6th grade AAP. He also participates in chorus and band. If I had to make a choice to cut AAP or cut the arts, AAP would go first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do any of you have thoughts or responses to Op's article? Or you just want to spout your opinions (educated or not) on AAP?

Well, here's the thing. The article is talking about highly gifted kids, probably those who cannot be taught in a standard classroom. I wonder just how many kids in AAP fit that description. Probably about 1-5% of the entire AAP population. So why is FCPS supporting this bloated program for a huge amount of kids most of whom are, at best, slightly advanced (if that)? There is no comparison between what FCPS is doing and what a true gifted program might actually accomplish.

[Anonymous]

And also, there's this (from the article):

"While he is not opposed to programs that identify and serve gifted children, Lucas warns that any such effort will be gamed by more well-to-do parents, angling to get their children in, then fighting to ensure the gifted group gets better teachers, newer technology, and other advantages.”

That's FCPS, right there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The primary mission of schools are to educate our children. Yes, the sports are important but NOT the primary mission. There are other opportunities to engage in team sports outside of schools. The money saved from all of the sports teams' operation should be spent for higher compensation for teachers, bonus programs, better books and equipment, tutoring programs, music and arts program (if they were cut) and try to change the culture of worshiping sports to emphasizing academic excellence.

We have to prioritize the mission of our schools to improve all of our schools on a more permanent basis.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AAP costs are minimal...last time they broke it out, the total cost was a few hundred K, and only for busing to the center school vs the base school.

This is not correct. The costs as laid out in the FY14 budget include things like $500,000 in central office IS costs, bus costs, supplies, etc. So the AAP cost is not simply the staff (which is in the $5M range per the FY14 budget - but all of the teaching staff would obviously still be needed). And the bus runs, while one poster mentioned that their child just hopped on an existing run, would not exist (not all of them) if the AAP program did not exist.

That said, school districts are required by law to provide special education services to students, and AAP falls under that umbrella. How they deliver the services is obviously up to the districts, but it varies widely across the district as has been discussed on other threads.

[Anonymous]

That said, school districts are required by law to provide special education services to students, and AAP falls under that umbrella

Is this true? I thought it was GT that fell under that umbrella. AAP needs to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP costs are minimal...last time they broke it out, the total cost was a few hundred K, and only for busing to the center school vs the base school.

That's bs. Take a look at the budget. Transportation alone is in the millions for AAP.

+1
And if we're talking about cutting something from the already depleted budget, we need to start somewhere. Getting rid of AAP is a great place to start.

I would get rid of AAP in Cluster 1 as all of the schools have enough students to have Local Level IV.

I would support this at the elementary level, but not at middle school and higher. Keep the centers in middle (Longfellow and Kilmer).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP costs are minimal...last time they broke it out, the total cost was a few hundred K, and only for busing to the center school vs the base school.

That's bs. Take a look at the budget. Transportation alone is in the millions for AAP.

+1
And if we're talking about cutting something from the already depleted budget, we need to start somewhere. Getting rid of AAP is a great place to start.

I would get rid of AAP in Cluster 1 as all of the schools have enough students to have Local Level IV.

I would support this at the elementary level, but not at middle school and higher. Keep the centers in middle (Longfellow and Kilmer).

Nope. Kilmer won't have the space. FCPS either needs to scale back AAP eligibilty or open a center at Cooper. You decide, but screwing around with boundaries just so several hundred AAP kids from the Langley district can be bussed to Kilmer and Longfellow should be off the table.

[Anonymous]

I'm sure lots of parents would be willing to drive to Longfellow for their center experience if within the Cooper boundary-I sure would!

[Anonymous]

Longfellow is overcrowded and will likely lose population to other Local Level IV middle school centers or have its center change to Local Level IV as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That said, school districts are required by law to provide special education services to students, and AAP falls under that umbrella

Is this true? I thought it was GT that fell under that umbrella. AAP needs to go.

AAP is FCPS's way of delivering gifted and talented services. It's the same thing in FCPS's eyes.