New Budget Recommendations -- eliminate AAP busing and centers

[Anonymous]

Separate gifted education is evil. It goes against all that public education stands for - it is saying that my neighbor's child is so different from mine that they can't be educated in the same classroom together or even the same building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Separate gifted education is evil. It goes against all that public education stands for - it is saying that my neighbor's child is so different from mine that they can't be educated in the same classroom together or even the same building.

I think where you and I are at odds is that I don't see my AAP kid as so special that he has to be separate. I see the AAP teachers and curriculum as so special that I don't want to lose it by going back to the non-AAP center school. My desire to keep my kid in an AAP center says nothing about you and your kid at a non-center school. It isn't about your kid being inferior, it's about the teaching at the non-AAP school being inferior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, the pp is arguing that centers are unnecessary because 10 years ago GT students were "always" in their base schools. I pointed out this is not true.

The point is that separate education (centers) for AAP kids is unnecessary. They can be taught in their own base schools, as they used to be. It's interesting that AAP parents think their kids need to be taught separately, but that it's just fine for the kids at the opposite end of the spectrum to be fully integrated in the General Ed. classes. If it's fine for those kids, then it should be fine for the AAP kids. Right? Or are AAP kids somehow entitled to a separate educational experience?

I disagree.

You disagree with what part? That kids on the lower end of the spectrum should be included in "regular" classrooms, or that AAP kids should be? Because if we're going to push for inclusion of all kids, then why should AAP be any different? No need for a special learning environment.

I disagree with your post.

I disagree too. Dunno where you got the not-so-interesting idea that all AAP parents think its just fine for every child but their own to have the same educational experience. Try again without the straw man.

Gosh, I don't know... maybe I got that idea after hearing AAP parents demanding ad nauseum to send their kids to centers and have them in AAP-only classrooms. Just a wild guess.

Wild as in reckless and wrong. Hearing AAP parents defend their kids' rights to get the education mandated by state law has nothing to do with whether kids "at the opposite end of the spectrum" should be grouped in General Ed. Why do you keep trying to connect the two?

Actually, the two have everything to do with one another and the fact that you can't (or won't) see that says a lot about your ability to connect the dots. If it's supposedly ok to educate one end of the spectrum together with Gen Ed kids, then it should be equally acceptable to also educate the other end of the spectrum with Gen Ed students. What makes you think AAP kids should have a separate learning experience, but all the other kids should be grouped together, regardless of learning abilities?

Sorry but that's just dumb. You are trying, desperately it seems, to draw some inequitable parallel where none exists. Who says it's "supposedly OK" to educate the other end of the spectrum in this or that way? You're the only one talking about it. AAP parents have absolutely nothing to do with decisions about what's best for kids with other types of needs. If professional educators believe "mainstreaming" or whatever you call it benefits certain kids so be it. Why would you have a problem with that just because the same educators believe another group of kids benefits from being together in a classroom of their peers? We understand that you don't like AAP kids having centers and classes of their own. There are reasonable arguments to be made on this topic, but the one you're fixating on is not one of them. Maybe try going down to the hospital and insisting that doctors treat hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia in the identical manner. After all, aren't they on opposite ends of the spectrum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:by "same curriculum" I mean there are many in gen ed who should have the AAP curriculum. I totally agree with that.

The schools formerly in Cluster 1 all have the AAP curriculum. So this does exist in FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:by "same curriculum" I mean there are many in gen ed who should have the AAP curriculum. I totally agree with that.

The schools formerly in Cluster 1 all have the AAP curriculum. So this does exist in FCPS.

Look beyond Cluster 1. There is a world that doesn't have access to the quality of instruction in AAP. I sympathize with those who say that is unfair. But, taking it away from my kid to make it "fair" isn't the answer... that just lowers the overall level of instruction. The answer might be to bring AAP to many more kids, or something else. Until then, heck yes... I want AAP to continue for my kid. It IS superior to what they are doing at the base school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Separate gifted education is evil. It goes against all that public education stands for - it is saying that my neighbor's child is so different from mine that they can't be educated in the same classroom together or even the same building.

I agree. And especially when looking at the very mainstream AAP kids of today - it's ludicrous to say this group needs to be educated separately. There may be a handful of exceptional kids within that group, but the vast majority are just normal kids who are no different than their Gen Ed peers. The system is bizarre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:by "same curriculum" I mean there are many in gen ed who should have the AAP curriculum. I totally agree with that.

The schools formerly in Cluster 1 all have the AAP curriculum. So this does exist in FCPS.

Look beyond Cluster 1. There is a world that doesn't have access to the quality of instruction in AAP. I sympathize with those who say that is unfair. But, taking it away from my kid to make it "fair" isn't the answer... that just lowers the overall level of instruction. The answer might be to bring AAP to many more kids, or something else. Until then, heck yes... I want AAP to continue for my kid. It IS superior to what they are doing at the base school.

And that, right there, is as good a reason as any to revamp the entire AAP system. Why should one group of kids receive a "superior" education to another group - in a public school system, no less? How is this fair or equitable in any way?

Answer: it's not and things need to change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:by "same curriculum" I mean there are many in gen ed who should have the AAP curriculum. I totally agree with that.

The schools formerly in Cluster 1 all have the AAP curriculum. So this does exist in FCPS.

Look beyond Cluster 1. There is a world that doesn't have access to the quality of instruction in AAP. I sympathize with those who say that is unfair. But, taking it away from my kid to make it "fair" isn't the answer... that just lowers the overall level of instruction. The answer might be to bring AAP to many more kids, or something else. Until then, heck yes... I want AAP to continue for my kid. It IS superior to what they are doing at the base school.

And that, right there, is as good a reason as any to revamp the entire AAP system. Why should one group of kids receive a "superior" education to another group - in a public school system, no less? How is this fair or equitable in any way?

Answer: it's not and things need to change.

It's all relative. For some, AAP wouldn't be considered superior because it's not the right fit for their child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:by "same curriculum" I mean there are many in gen ed who should have the AAP curriculum. I totally agree with that.

The schools formerly in Cluster 1 all have the AAP curriculum. So this does exist in FCPS.

Look beyond Cluster 1. There is a world that doesn't have access to the quality of instruction in AAP. I sympathize with those who say that is unfair. But, taking it away from my kid to make it "fair" isn't the answer... that just lowers the overall level of instruction. The answer might be to bring AAP to many more kids, or something else. Until then, heck yes... I want AAP to continue for my kid. It IS superior to what they are doing at the base school.

And that, right there, is as good a reason as any to revamp the entire AAP system. Why should one group of kids receive a "superior" education to another group - in a public school system, no less? How is this fair or equitable in any way?

Answer: it's not and things need to change.

AAP Level IV services in one part of the county are not equivalent in other parts of the county, either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Separate gifted education is evil. It goes against all that public education stands for - it is saying that my neighbor's child is so different from mine that they can't be educated in the same classroom together or even the same building.

ISIS is evil. AAP is, at most annoying. Dramatic & hysterical much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Separate gifted education is evil. It goes against all that public education stands for - it is saying that my neighbor's child is so different from mine that they can't be educated in the same classroom together or even the same building.

ISIS is evil. AAP is, at most annoying. Dramatic & hysterical much?

Not the PP, but I agree with him/her. AAP is not only annoying, it's divisive and inequitable.

[Anonymous]

Life isn't "fair and equitable" people. Don't you know that by now??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Separate gifted education is evil. It goes against all that public education stands for - it is saying that my neighbor's child is so different from mine that they can't be educated in the same classroom together or even the same building.

ISIS is evil. AAP is, at most annoying. Dramatic & hysterical much?

Not the PP, but I agree with him/her. AAP is not only annoying, it's divisive and inequitable.

Many would disagree. My Gen Ed kid couldn't care less if some kids go to a different school for 4-6 years. It seems only a small vocal minority obsess over it.

[Anonymous]

To summarize this 22 page-long thread:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Life isn't "fair and equitable" people. Don't you know that by now??

Anyone up.for a challenge?

Pop quiz for you parents out there-- can you name 3 things that are fair and equitable?

The catch is that we all have to agree that what you list is fair and equitable.


I bet we can all easily list 10 things that aren't fair, #1 would be the FCPS AAP.