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

[Anonymous]

So you are King (or Queen) of FCPS Advanced Academic Programs for a day . . . what would you do?

Would you close all the AAP Centers?

Would you put AAP Centers in every school?

Would you make all the kids get retested and only allow in the top 5% of students?

Something else?

What would you do?

[Anonymous]

All my kids are in AAP. Just leave it as is.

[Anonymous]

WOuld make AAP the norm for all students, and I would pull out remidail students to offer extra support. I would also pull out the exceptional (based on in-class work) for extra offerings.

[Anonymous]

Banish all the crazy, helicopter, test-prepping parents from the kingdom!

[Anonymous]

I would change it to be by subject. Some of the top test takers still struggle with certain subjects. Some struggle with writing, others struggle with math. It shouldn't be all or nothing.

[Anonymous]

If there were more any one class of AAP, I would group the kids based on age . Younger 7 years old in one class and the older 7 years old or 8 years old in another class. I think it is very difficult for the teachers to grade students accurately when comparing kids in one class and you are really comparing young kids to older kids who are developmentally more mature. I would this also in the gen ed classes, group them based on age Summer births and Winter births.

[Anonymous]

I agree with the above poster who would do pull-outs for certain subjects. Third grade is too early to pull out all the high-achievers. It leaves the general ed classes "flat" without the top 15% of the performers there, and the 85% feel like they aren't very smart (so sad for such young kids). My two cents. Maybe go to the old model, where only the top 1-2% of learners (the profoundly gifted) go to a center when shown that they can't function (socially or academically) with the other kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree with the above poster who would do pull-outs for certain subjects. Third grade is too early to pull out all the high-achievers. It leaves the general ed classes "flat" without the top 15% of the performers there, and the 85% feel like they aren't very smart (so sad for such young kids). My two cents. Maybe go to the old model, where only the top 1-2% of learners (the profoundly gifted) go to a center when shown that they can't function (socially or academically) with the other kids.

P.S. If it matters, both of mine are at the center, but they are not profoundly gifted and would do just fine in general ed in the base school.

[Anonymous]

I would do pull out for the bottom half and let gen ed be more challenging.

[Anonymous]

Agreed to above poster. The lower 20% (not half) continually drag down the upper learners who aren't in AAP. Or, just stop mainstreaimg every student.

[Anonymous]

I would dial it back to the way they used to do it.
WISC testing required
130+ gets school based services
140+ gets center placement

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would dial it back to the way they used to do it.
WISC testing required
130+ gets school based services
140+ gets center placement

+1

[Anonymous]

^ That's dumb. WISC doesn't prove anything. It's an advanced academic program for kids who've demonstrated they are advanced academically. That's what matters.

[Anonymous]

WISC is the best measure of intellectual horsepower. AAP/GT is about giving the smartest a chance.

[Anonymous]

I would allow anyone in: open admissions. But I would make it true gifted, where the smartest and best excel. And, while it is open to anyone, there are metrics. If the metrics are not met, back to general ed.