Are you in AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

PP here. I had kids in AAP so that's not the issue. Funny, how it's always the assumption that it's a GE parent complaining about AAP. I just don't think it's a fair program that serves the needs of the kids it's designed for. Too much spillover to kids who are above average bright (which ain't rare at all in these parts) and too many URM kids not identified and served. It's also damaging to neighborhood schools and communities.

Most parents of athletic kids, including myself, would happily pay a participation fee, so that is also a non-issue. Also, it's fairly difficult to excel in the athletic arena if you aren't any good. Unlike AAP if you get on the team but don't produce you'll find yourself on the bench or dropped. AAP is in and done, even if a kid can't handle the rigors without tutors. So no comparison really. Also, schools aren't in the business of providing athletic opportunities or acting. They are supposed to provide an appropriate education. The lions share of funding for sports at our school, theatre and other extracurriculars at our schools comes from fundraising.

And if you're begrudging dollars spent on ESL kids you should be ashamed of yourself or go live somewhere without the diversity.

The fact that you would even suggest PP was actually begrudging dollars spent on ESL shows you're either grasping at straws or missing the point.

Go reread her message. You don't get to choose what you fund, she says, lumping ESL with sports.

More importantly, taxpayers do get to choose that funds not be misallocated. Using tax dollars to segregate schools along economic lines (and that's what happens in many AAP center s(McLean and Vienna) because the kids there are supposedly "gifted" is not an appropriate allocation of public school funds -- unless you think rich or prepped kids around here need deserve a special advantage in a public system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

PP here. I had kids in AAP so that's not the issue. Funny, how it's always the assumption that it's a GE parent complaining about AAP. I just don't think it's a fair program that serves the needs of the kids it's designed for. Too much spillover to kids who are above average bright (which ain't rare at all in these parts) and too many URM kids not identified and served. It's also damaging to neighborhood schools and communities.

Most parents of athletic kids, including myself, would happily pay a participation fee, so that is also a non-issue. Also, it's fairly difficult to excel in the athletic arena if you aren't any good. Unlike AAP if you get on the team but don't produce you'll find yourself on the bench or dropped. AAP is in and done, even if a kid can't handle the rigors without tutors. So no comparison really. Also, schools aren't in the business of providing athletic opportunities or acting. They are supposed to provide an appropriate education. The lions share of funding for sports at our school, theatre and other extracurriculars at our schools comes from fundraising.

And if you're begrudging dollars spent on ESL kids you should be ashamed of yourself or go live somewhere without the diversity.

The fact that you would even suggest PP was actually begrudging dollars spent on ESL shows you're either grasping at straws or missing the point.

Go reread her message. You don't get to choose what you fund, she says, lumping ESL with sports.

More importantly, taxpayers do get to choose that funds not be misallocated. Using tax dollars to segregate schools along economic lines (and that's what happens in many AAP center s(McLean and Vienna) because the kids there are supposedly "gifted" is not an appropriate allocation of public school funds -- unless you think rich or prepped kids around here need deserve a special advantage in a public system.

What schools in Vienna are segregated among economic lines?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

PP here. I had kids in AAP so that's not the issue. Funny, how it's always the assumption that it's a GE parent complaining about AAP. I just don't think it's a fair program that serves the needs of the kids it's designed for. Too much spillover to kids who are above average bright (which ain't rare at all in these parts) and too many URM kids not identified and served. It's also damaging to neighborhood schools and communities.

Most parents of athletic kids, including myself, would happily pay a participation fee, so that is also a non-issue. Also, it's fairly difficult to excel in the athletic arena if you aren't any good. Unlike AAP if you get on the team but don't produce you'll find yourself on the bench or dropped. AAP is in and done, even if a kid can't handle the rigors without tutors. So no comparison really. Also, schools aren't in the business of providing athletic opportunities or acting. They are supposed to provide an appropriate education. The lions share of funding for sports at our school, theatre and other extracurriculars at our schools comes from fundraising.

And if you're begrudging dollars spent on ESL kids you should be ashamed of yourself or go live somewhere without the diversity.

The fact that you would even suggest PP was actually begrudging dollars spent on ESL shows you're either grasping at straws or missing the point.

ESL, drama as a class and sports and things that. FCPS does fund (trainers, coaches, drama as a class, ESL in general) are things there are funded that don't personally benefit my kids. That doen't mean they should be cut. I recognize that even though my kids do not need or want these things, they are very important to a subset of kids. Like AAP.

Go reread her message. You don't get to choose what you fund, she says, lumping ESL with sports.

More importantly, taxpayers do get to choose that funds not be misallocated. Using tax dollars to segregate schools along economic lines (and that's what happens in many AAP center s(McLean and Vienna) because the kids there are supposedly "gifted" is not an appropriate allocation of public school funds -- unless you think rich or prepped kids around here need deserve a special advantage in a public system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Putting kids in separate AAP classrooms, as is done at center schools, does no one any good.

P!ease do not speak for my kids, who benefitted greatly from attending AAP Center classes where teachers and staff partnered to identify, document, and implement the necessary supports for my children with LDs. We tried the Local Level IV option at our base school and it was a failure. At the recommendation of our kids' doctors, we switched them to the Center program, where both kids were successful.

Maybe the Center did not work well for your kids. However, your kids do not represent the needs of all kids.

NP here. It is good your child's needs were met. I know a couple of other brilliant children with disabilities who were served very well by AAP. That said, I think they would be even better served if AAP was still an actual gifted program. As PPs have noted, too many kids of similar abilities arbitrarily consigned to in GE, too many prepped and parentally pushed children getting a better education than their intellectual peers simply because mom and dad know how to work the system. Too many gifted SES kids dropping through the cracks, while well-heeled parents brag that their non-gifted child still needs AAP. Too much entitlement, not enough equity. The current method for separating kids into AAP and GE is a scam.

There is no scam, myth, or conspiracy with AAP. It is actually a very transparent, thorough, and fair screening system. I guarantee you, if parent referral or appeals options were taken away, parents would complain that the system is terrible because it is all based on test scores and one score on one day (or 2 NNAT and CoGAT) does not give a complete picture - and DCUM would be full of these complainers. Likewise, if the the required test scores were raised, parents of children who just missed the benchmark would complain that their children are NO DIFFERENT than the kids who made the benchmark. If Centers were eliminated, parents would complain about preferential treatment for Local level IV students in their school. FCPS tries to be as inclusive as possible and we live in a highly educated area.

The 'stress' really is parent driven. AAP is not that big of a deal. I tell my kids - yeah, you do well with an accelerated academic curriculum, good for you, big deal. There are kids in Gen Ed and/or AAP that can speak 3 languages, or are brilliantly artistic or are incredible athletes. The fact that you are academically gifted is great and all, but success is more determined by a positive attitude, a spirit of gratitude, hard work, determination and the way in which you approach challenges. No way do my kids think they are superior for being in AAP. And if they were in Gen Ed, I would be saying the exact same thing!

It would be great if more AAP parents were like you.

It's nice that you don't make a big deal about AAP for your kids. But throwing your hands up and saying we can't change AAP or make the standards higher because people would complain is a cop-out acceptable only to folks comfortable with the inequitable status quo. A program that was designed to meet the needs of "gifted" kids has been turned into something that primarily rewards high SES households where parents have the means to enrich their kids. That's not what I'm paying taxes for and I'd wager plenty of other FFX residents feel the same way. A public system needs to meet the needs of all kids and not the better prepared more than others. If FCPS is going to segregate kids by academic potential they need to find a better way to do it.

Agree completely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're talking about the hugely bloated AAP program which sees fit to divide kids into two groups, in which the vast majority of kids in both groups are extremely similar. It's only the outliers, on both ends of the spectrum, who truly need intervention and specialized teaching methods. It's moronic to claim that this program is actually serving a purpose, other than to create an us and them mentality amongst the kids and parents of FCPS.

It's a feeder system to TJ and artificially skews the demand curve.

Solution? Close TJ. AAP mania solved.

You may be right. But what I find interesting is how few kids are actually accepted to TJ. I think it's a reality check for the many AAP parents who actually believe that just because their kid is in AAP, they must be gifted. The kids who don't get into TJ simply go to their regular high schools, along with - gasp! - everyone else. Where they are indistinguishable from all the other kids.

[Anonymous]

I'm the OP again. As I mentioned I'm a teacher. This is off topic but every year I write a few TJ recommendations and I rarely have a student that wants to go. Most are thrilled when they don't get in because they can stay with their friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm the OP again. As I mentioned I'm a teacher. This is off topic but every year I write a few TJ recommendations and I rarely have a student that wants to go. Most are thrilled when they don't get in because they can stay with their friends.

And many kids are like my DS (not Asian BTW) and a couple of his friends who wanted it badly, worked very hard in MS to make it happen. And were thrilled to get in. (And in the case of DS, "prepping" consisted of a one week summer class familiarizing him with the test and a few hours spent with me brainstorming SIS ideas and writing practice essays). Certainly, some kids go to TJ because their parents tell them to apply. But many really want the STEM opportunity, the unique learning environment, and to be around kids with similar interests. And in the case of DS, find even a "good" AAP ES/MS center to be not nearly challenging enough. It's a shame Getting into TJ has become such a rat race. But it still serves a valuable purpose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're talking about the hugely bloated AAP program which sees fit to divide kids into two groups, in which the vast majority of kids in both groups are extremely similar. It's only the outliers, on both ends of the spectrum, who truly need intervention and specialized teaching methods. It's moronic to claim that this program is actually serving a purpose, other than to create an us and them mentality amongst the kids and parents of FCPS.

It's a feeder system to TJ and artificially skews the demand curve.

Solution? Close TJ. AAP mania solved.

You may be right. But what I find interesting is how few kids are actually accepted to TJ. I think it's a reality check for the many AAP parents who actually believe that just because their kid is in AAP, they must be gifted. The kids who don't get into TJ simply go to their regular high schools, along with - gasp! - everyone else. Where they are indistinguishable from all the other kids.

NP here: for my kids (one in HS and one in MS AAP), the AAP Center experience greatly helped them as they had 504 accommodations that were better addressed at the AAP Center then in the base school (with Local Level IV). There was never any desire to go to TJ, even though they are both STEM-leaning kids. (DD in MS may or may not take the TJ test, but she doesn't need to decide on that as she'll be starting 7th grade.)

I have no desire to debate the "gifted" label, as the AAP experience has worked well for each of them. My DS in high school had great supports in ES and MS through his 504 accommodations, in conjunction with what the school counselor was able to provide. Label my kids how ever you'd like; the AAP Center experience has worked well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're talking about the hugely bloated AAP program which sees fit to divide kids into two groups, in which the vast majority of kids in both groups are extremely similar. It's only the outliers, on both ends of the spectrum, who truly need intervention and specialized teaching methods. It's moronic to claim that this program is actually serving a purpose, other than to create an us and them mentality amongst the kids and parents of FCPS.

It's a feeder system to TJ and artificially skews the demand curve.

Solution? Close TJ. AAP mania solved.

Actually, an all-around better solution to solving AAP mania would be to open up more TJ-type schools, maybe directed to STEM or maybe directed to language arts, arts and music, etc. More magnet schools, more supply to meet demand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're talking about the hugely bloated AAP program which sees fit to divide kids into two groups, in which the vast majority of kids in both groups are extremely similar. It's only the outliers, on both ends of the spectrum, who truly need intervention and specialized teaching methods. It's moronic to claim that this program is actually serving a purpose, other than to create an us and them mentality amongst the kids and parents of FCPS.

It's a feeder system to TJ and artificially skews the demand curve.

Solution? Close TJ. AAP mania solved.

Actually, an all-around better solution to solving AAP mania would be to open up more TJ-type schools, maybe directed to STEM or maybe directed to language arts, arts and music, etc. More magnet schools, more supply to meet demand.

And when Virginians decide they want to pay LOTS more in taxes that will happen. In case you haven't been paying attention, teacher raises that were supposed to be funded haven't even been funded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're talking about the hugely bloated AAP program which sees fit to divide kids into two groups, in which the vast majority of kids in both groups are extremely similar. It's only the outliers, on both ends of the spectrum, who truly need intervention and specialized teaching methods. It's moronic to claim that this program is actually serving a purpose, other than to create an us and them mentality amongst the kids and parents of FCPS.

It's a feeder system to TJ and artificially skews the demand curve.

Solution? Close TJ. AAP mania solved.

Actually, an all-around better solution to solving AAP mania would be to open up more TJ-type schools, maybe directed to STEM or maybe directed to language arts, arts and music, etc. More magnet schools, more supply to meet demand.

+1. This is one thing MCPS and even DCPS do better than FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're talking about the hugely bloated AAP program which sees fit to divide kids into two groups, in which the vast majority of kids in both groups are extremely similar. It's only the outliers, on both ends of the spectrum, who truly need intervention and specialized teaching methods. It's moronic to claim that this program is actually serving a purpose, other than to create an us and them mentality amongst the kids and parents of FCPS.

It's a feeder system to TJ and artificially skews the demand curve.

Solution? Close TJ. AAP mania solved.

Actually, an all-around better solution to solving AAP mania would be to open up more TJ-type schools, maybe directed to STEM or maybe directed to language arts, arts and music, etc. More magnet schools, more supply to meet demand.

I'm not at all interested in having my taxes fund more TJ-like schools. I think the one TJ we currently have serves a purpose, but it's not a school my kids would ever want to attend. They lean heavily toward the humanities and not STEM subjects. It would be fantastic to have a humanities-focused magnet high school, but I have no desire to help fund more STEM schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Putting kids in separate AAP classrooms, as is done at center schools, does no one any good.

P!ease do not speak for my kids, who benefitted greatly from attending AAP Center classes where teachers and staff partnered to identify, document, and implement the necessary supports for my children with LDs. We tried the Local Level IV option at our base school and it was a failure. At the recommendation of our kids' doctors, we switched them to the Center program, where both kids were successful.

Maybe the Center did not work well for your kids. However, your kids do not represent the needs of all kids.

+1

The center was the best solution for our DC as well. Our base had issues that meant kids who were able to work at a faster pace and more in depth would have had no opportunity to do so. People who gripe about the evils of separate AAP classes and centers must come from ideal base schools perfectly able to meet the needs of all kids. Our base sure wasn't like that.

[Anonymous]

The center model has worked well for all three of my children. One has an IQ of 155, another has 132. The third has a GAI of 141, and a 504 for extreme low processing. Basically small class for testing and longer testing time.

For the 1st, MS was the first challenging environment and mainly because of self-stress. By 8th grade, DC was all As. For the 2nd, the center provides an environment where DCs perfection is rewarded. For the 3rd, the center has proven to be a great reward as DCs teachers understand 2E kids.

The GE model would have created hardship for my kids. DC1 was basically an in-class tutor for k-2. Even the school said they couldn't do much for DC than they were doing. For DC 2, the lowest common denominator model used in GE was not beneficial to DCs perfectionism. As for DC3, being 2E and in an environment in which the teacher is certified in gifted education had been great!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The center model has worked well for all three of my children. One has an IQ of 155, another has 132. The third has a GAI of 141, and a 504 for extreme low processing. Basically small class for testing and longer testing time.

For the 1st, MS was the first challenging environment and mainly because of self-stress. By 8th grade, DC was all As. For the 2nd, the center provides an environment where DCs perfection is rewarded. For the 3rd, the center has proven to be a great reward as DCs teachers understand 2E kids.

The GE model would have created hardship for my kids. DC1 was basically an in-class tutor for k-2. Even the school said they couldn't do much for DC than they were doing. For DC 2, the lowest common denominator model used in GE was not beneficial to DCs perfectionism. As for DC3, being 2E and in an environment in which the teacher is certified in gifted education had been great!

What's wrong with that? A big part of the younger grades is socialization and learning to get along. Is your DC's intelligence going to drain away if she has to help others? Could it be these children your resent your daughter had to help might have something to teach her?

And how do you know the GE model (most of us call it public school) would create hardship for your kids? I've had kids in both and somehow they've all managed to get fine educations. Your attitude of entitlement is a perfect example of what is wrong with the whole AAP system. I'm not saying that they don't deserve to be there, because they sound very smart. I'm just saying since they're not in GE you don't know what mixing with the unwashed might have taught them.