Question for those whose children were not admitted...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This is the result of turning a gifted program into advanced academics. When my son was in the GT program, the whole point was the busy work and unnecessary homework went away. He was very engaged in his school work, at school, but not doing heaps of h homework at night because he and his classmates "got" what they were teaching and didn't need all the repetition.

What year was that?

It is ridiculous. You hear this argument all the time: it was a gifted program when my kid went, but not now. Translation: Her kid really needed the program b/c her kid is really gifted. Today's program is not a gifted program and the children currently in it are not really that bright...well, compared to her kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is the result of turning a gifted program into advanced academics. When my son was in the GT program, the whole point was the busy work and unnecessary homework went away. He was very engaged in his school work, at school, but not doing heaps of h homework at night because he and his classmates "got" what they were teaching and didn't need all the repetition.

What year was that?

It is ridiculous. You hear this argument all the time: it was a gifted program when my kid went, but not now. Translation: Her kid really needed the program b/c her kid is really gifted. Today's program is not a gifted program and the children currently in it are not really that bright...well, compared to her kid.

Not the PP - you may not like hearing it, but it is the truth. The GT program was a far different animal than AAP of today. The kids in GT were truly exceptional (high IQ) and everyone knew it. There was no resentment because most kids were in General Ed. GT was reserved for kids with exceptional ability. There is no way anyone could argue that AAP comes anywhere close to that model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is the result of turning a gifted program into advanced academics. When my son was in the GT program, the whole point was the busy work and unnecessary homework went away. He was very engaged in his school work, at school, but not doing heaps of h homework at night because he and his classmates "got" what they were teaching and didn't need all the repetition.

What year was that?

It is ridiculous. You hear this argument all the time: it was a gifted program when my kid went, but not now. Translation: Her kid really needed the program b/c her kid is really gifted. Today's program is not a gifted program and the children currently in it are not really that bright...well, compared to her kid.

Not the PP - you may not like hearing it, but it is the truth. The GT program was a far different animal than AAP of today. The kids in GT were truly exceptional (high IQ) and everyone knew it. There was no resentment because most kids were in General Ed. GT was reserved for kids with exceptional ability. There is no way anyone could argue that AAP comes anywhere close to that model.

Most kids are still in Gen Ed. Folks who say otherwise are either talking about their own unique neighborhood stats or are zoned for an overcrowded center that makes it seem like most kids are designated AAP. Our school sent only a handful to 3rd grade center. And no, we're not "low SES".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is the result of turning a gifted program into advanced academics. When my son was in the GT program, the whole point was the busy work and unnecessary homework went away. He was very engaged in his school work, at school, but not doing heaps of h homework at night because he and his classmates "got" what they were teaching and didn't need all the repetition.

What year was that?

It is ridiculous. You hear this argument all the time: it was a gifted program when my kid went, but not now. Translation: Her kid really needed the program b/c her kid is really gifted. Today's program is not a gifted program and the children currently in it are not really that bright...well, compared to her kid.

Not the PP - you may not like hearing it, but it is the truth. The GT program was a far different animal than AAP of today. The kids in GT were truly exceptional (high IQ) and everyone knew it. There was no resentment because most kids were in General Ed. GT was reserved for kids with exceptional ability. There is no way anyone could argue that AAP comes anywhere close to that model.

Very true. grew up in FCPS in the 70/80s and knew maybe 1 or 2 kids who were in GT. Very few parents discussed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is the result of turning a gifted program into advanced academics. When my son was in the GT program, the whole point was the busy work and unnecessary homework went away. He was very engaged in his school work, at school, but not doing heaps of h homework at night because he and his classmates "got" what they were teaching and didn't need all the repetition.

What year was that?

It is ridiculous. You hear this argument all the time: it was a gifted program when my kid went, but not now. Translation: Her kid really needed the program b/c her kid is really gifted. Today's program is not a gifted program and the children currently in it are not really that bright...well, compared to her kid.

Not the PP - you may not like hearing it, but it is the truth. The GT program was a far different animal than AAP of today. The kids in GT were truly exceptional (high IQ) and everyone knew it. There was no resentment because most kids were in General Ed. GT was reserved for kids with exceptional ability. There is no way anyone could argue that AAP comes anywhere close to that model.

Very true. grew up in FCPS in the 70/80s and knew maybe 1 or 2 kids who were in GT. Very few parents discussed.

+1
It was a total non-issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is the result of turning a gifted program into advanced academics. When my son was in the GT program, the whole point was the busy work and unnecessary homework went away. He was very engaged in his school work, at school, but not doing heaps of h homework at night because he and his classmates "got" what they were teaching and didn't need all the repetition.

What year was that?

It is ridiculous. You hear this argument all the time: it was a gifted program when my kid went, but not now. Translation: Her kid really needed the program b/c her kid is really gifted. Today's program is not a gifted program and the children currently in it are not really that bright...well, compared to her kid.

Not the PP - you may not like hearing it, but it is the truth. The GT program was a far different animal than AAP of today. The kids in GT were truly exceptional (high IQ) and everyone knew it. There was no resentment because most kids were in General Ed. GT was reserved for kids with exceptional ability. There is no way anyone could argue that AAP comes anywhere close to that model.

Most kids are still in Gen Ed. Folks who say otherwise are either talking about their own unique neighborhood stats or are zoned for an overcrowded center that makes it seem like most kids are designated AAP. Our school sent only a handful to 3rd grade center. And no, we're not "low SES".

I'm talking about a huge area of the county, not just one specific neighborhood. Most of the kids around here (Vienna, Oakton, Great Falls, McLean, Chantilly) are in AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is the result of turning a gifted program into advanced academics. When my son was in the GT program, the whole point was the busy work and unnecessary homework went away. He was very engaged in his school work, at school, but not doing heaps of h homework at night because he and his classmates "got" what they were teaching and didn't need all the repetition.

What year was that?

It is ridiculous. You hear this argument all the time: it was a gifted program when my kid went, but not now. Translation: Her kid really needed the program b/c her kid is really gifted. Today's program is not a gifted program and the children currently in it are not really that bright...well, compared to her kid.

Not the PP - you may not like hearing it, but it is the truth. The GT program was a far different animal than AAP of today. The kids in GT were truly exceptional (high IQ) and everyone knew it. There was no resentment because most kids were in General Ed. GT was reserved for kids with exceptional ability. There is no way anyone could argue that AAP comes anywhere close to that model.

Most kids are still in Gen Ed. Folks who say otherwise are either talking about their own unique neighborhood stats or are zoned for an overcrowded center that makes it seem like most kids are designated AAP. Our school sent only a handful to 3rd grade center. And no, we're not "low SES".

I'm talking about a huge area of the county, not just one specific neighborhood. Most of the kids around here (Vienna, Oakton, Great Falls, McLean, Chantilly) are in AAP.

Really? Are you referring to elementary school Level IV AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is the result of turning a gifted program into advanced academics. When my son was in the GT program, the whole point was the busy work and unnecessary homework went away. He was very engaged in his school work, at school, but not doing heaps of h homework at night because he and his classmates "got" what they were teaching and didn't need all the repetition.

What year was that?

It is ridiculous. You hear this argument all the time: it was a gifted program when my kid went, but not now. Translation: Her kid really needed the program b/c her kid is really gifted. Today's program is not a gifted program and the children currently in it are not really that bright...well, compared to her kid.

Not the PP - you may not like hearing it, but it is the truth. The GT program was a far different animal than AAP of today. The kids in GT were truly exceptional (high IQ) and everyone knew it. There was no resentment because most kids were in General Ed. GT was reserved for kids with exceptional ability. There is no way anyone could argue that AAP comes anywhere close to that model.

Most kids are still in Gen Ed. Folks who say otherwise are either talking about their own unique neighborhood stats or are zoned for an overcrowded center that makes it seem like most kids are designated AAP. Our school sent only a handful to 3rd grade center. And no, we're not "low SES".

I'm talking about a huge area of the county, not just one specific neighborhood. Most of the kids around here (Vienna, Oakton, Great Falls, McLean, Chantilly) are in AAP.

Really? Are you referring to elementary school Level IV AAP?

I looked up the School Profile June 2015 Membership numbers for schools in Vienna:

http://www.city-data.com/school/Vienna-Virginia.html

and it does not seem like "most of the kids" in Vienna are in AAP.

Vienna school 3 4 5 6 3-6 Gen Ed AAP-Lvl IV CTR/PG
Louise Archer 56 53 32 51 192 312
Colvin Run 55 63 50 57 225 326
Cunningham Park 73 49 66 50 238 517
Flint Hill 59 92 86 70 307 103
Freedom Hill 65 60 48 55 228 62
Marshall Road 75 93 66 73 307 12
Stenwood 56 57 57 63 233 10
Vienna 43 39 44 55 181
Westbriar 68 78 49 60 255 111
Wolftrap 58 52 42 55 207 127

[Anonymous]

Colvin Run doesn't feed to Marshall or Madison so I wouldn't include that school in a Vienna. For Vienna, not including Colvin Run, about 36% of students are in AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is the result of turning a gifted program into advanced academics. When my son was in the GT program, the whole point was the busy work and unnecessary homework went away. He was very engaged in his school work, at school, but not doing heaps of h homework at night because he and his classmates "got" what they were teaching and didn't need all the repetition.

What year was that?

It is ridiculous. You hear this argument all the time: it was a gifted program when my kid went, but not now. Translation: Her kid really needed the program b/c her kid is really gifted. Today's program is not a gifted program and the children currently in it are not really that bright...well, compared to her kid.

Not the PP - you may not like hearing it, but it is the truth. The GT program was a far different animal than AAP of today. The kids in GT were truly exceptional (high IQ) and everyone knew it. There was no resentment because most kids were in General Ed. GT was reserved for kids with exceptional ability. There is no way anyone could argue that AAP comes anywhere close to that model.

Very true. grew up in FCPS in the 70/80s and knew maybe 1 or 2 kids who were in GT. Very few parents discussed.

+1
It was a total non-issue.

How do you feel general ed now compares to general ed from before? Did the AAP kids like being bussed so far away like they are for TJ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is the result of turning a gifted program into advanced academics. When my son was in the GT program, the whole point was the busy work and unnecessary homework went away. He was very engaged in his school work, at school, but not doing heaps of h homework at night because he and his classmates "got" what they were teaching and didn't need all the repetition.

What year was that?

It is ridiculous. You hear this argument all the time: it was a gifted program when my kid went, but not now. Translation: Her kid really needed the program b/c her kid is really gifted. Today's program is not a gifted program and the children currently in it are not really that bright...well, compared to her kid.

Not the PP - you may not like hearing it, but it is the truth. The GT program was a far different animal than AAP of today. The kids in GT were truly exceptional (high IQ) and everyone knew it. There was no resentment because most kids were in General Ed. GT was reserved for kids with exceptional ability. There is no way anyone could argue that AAP comes anywhere close to that model.

Yeah, I totally agree with this. Have you talked to any of those kids going to an Ivy these days - man, they let anyone in. Back in my day getting an Ivy League degree really meant something.

[Anonymous]

I think, in general, kids are different now, however. For goodness sakes, look at how high our kids in this area score on the CogAT compared to nationwide. I grew up in this area, was in the "GT" program back then (when it was supposed to be so exclusive ) and think that overall kids are much brighter now. Think of kindergarten alone - much more academic, full day, many kids are advanced readers, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think, in general, kids are different now, however. For goodness sakes, look at how high our kids in this area score on the CogAT compared to nationwide. I grew up in this area, was in the "GT" program back then (when it was supposed to be so exclusive ) and think that overall kids are much brighter now. Think of kindergarten alone - much more academic, full day, many kids are advanced readers, etc.

Why do people equate early/advanced readers with intelligence- when reading ability, especially in the first half of ES, is not highly correlated to intelligence?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This is the result of turning a gifted program into advanced academics. When my son was in the GT program, the whole point was the busy work and unnecessary homework went away. He was very engaged in his school work, at school, but not doing heaps of h homework at night because he and his classmates "got" what they were teaching and didn't need all the repetition.

What year was that?

10 or 12 or so years ago they changed the name from G&T to AAP, but it must have been before then because the cutoff for CogAt was still around the same in the immediate years prior - generally between 130-135- depending on the year. There were no substantive changes to the program at the time either. They added the Naglieri the next year for first graders. My eldest is a college freshman and about a third of his class qualified for Level IV AAP and a few more left every year after that. He did attend one of the "higher rated" McLean ES where AAP enrollment has perennially been high. My younger DS is currently a junior and his was the first year they offered a real LLIV program- which the majority chose and continue to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think, in general, kids are different now, however. For goodness sakes, look at how high our kids in this area score on the CogAT compared to nationwide. I grew up in this area, was in the "GT" program back then (when it was supposed to be so exclusive ) and think that overall kids are much brighter now. Think of kindergarten alone - much more academic, full day, many kids are advanced readers, etc.

Why do people equate early/advanced readers with intelligence- when reading ability, especially in the first half of ES, is not highly correlated to intelligence?

Dunno - I guess ask Davidson: http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10162.aspx "What are early signs of extreme intelligence?
Infants, toddlers, and preschoolers in the very highest ranges of intelligence often demonstrate very specific characteristics. A recent developmental study of 241 profoundly gifted children between 160 and 237+ IQ (Stanford-Binet Form LM) discovered that:...The mean age at which the children sight-read an easy reader was before 4. (Rogers & Silverman, 1997)"

Or http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/reports/trifolds/a9403p.pdf ".Exceptionally high verbal intelligence is neither necessary nor sufficient to make a
child become a precocious reader, although highly intelligent children are more likely to begin reading early"