What really IS the point of AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Creating this kind of competitive educational system also does one more thing: instead of teaching 1-4 different levels of kids in one class at a school, it’s down to about 1-2 for gen Ed and and AAP. It is a little easier for teachers. And I think helpful is raising kids up without lowering kids down.

In theory, that's how it should work. In practice, they aren't really looking at the kids' achievement levels when deciding whether they are admitted to AAP, and they aren't looking at the reading or math levels that can be accommodated in the base school. My DD: perfect reading SOL every single year. Always at the maxed out DRA of 1 year above grade level. Rejected from AAP and frequently unable to be placed in a reading group at her level because there weren't any other kids reading a year above in gen ed. At least 2 years had to repeat info from the previous year due to being "folded down" into a lower reading group. Despite screwing over my DD, the teacher still had 4 grade levels to differentiate across, ranging from 3 years below grade level to on grade level.

My DS: Attended the center. Was reading 2 years above grade level. The teacher met with his group at most 15 minutes per week because there was a below grade level reading group and an on grade level reading group in AAP. The teacher still had 4 levels to differentiate across, ranging from 1 year below through 2 years above. The teacher was pressured to focus on the below kids at the expense of the above kids.

So glad they stopped that above group/below group stuff at our center school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. What is the point for elementary and middle when anyone can take AP in high school? It also seems like unless you have a goal for TJ, there really is no actual purpose earlier on... My child got accepted and will be starting this year but I am still boggled on whether it’s actually worth something so early on. Would love feedback on what you feel your child gained from the program overall...Or if they gained anything at all?

The biggest point is a better peer group, the rest is fluff.

Then why don't more parents look at the Language immersion programs? There is a self selection process that tends to lead to kids who do not have learning issues or major behavior issues in the LI classes and parents who are more engaged in their kids education. The level of differentiation tends to be less drastic because of the kids in the program. I know that there are wait lists for some of the programs but they are not nearly as long as I would expect given that there are parents who are so invested in finding a "good" peer group for their kids.

We are in LI and know parents who have kids in the LI program and Gen Ed program. Those parents tell us that the expectations and behaviors in the two groups are really, really different.

Why is the focus for so many parents on AAP when there are other options that start earlier and provide kids with additional academic challenge and a better peer group?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. What is the point for elementary and middle when anyone can take AP in high school? It also seems like unless you have a goal for TJ, there really is no actual purpose earlier on... My child got accepted and will be starting this year but I am still boggled on whether it’s actually worth something so early on. Would love feedback on what you feel your child gained from the program overall...Or if they gained anything at all?

The biggest point is a better peer group, the rest is fluff.

Then why don't more parents look at the Language immersion programs? There is a self selection process that tends to lead to kids who do not have learning issues or major behavior issues in the LI classes and parents who are more engaged in their kids education. The level of differentiation tends to be less drastic because of the kids in the program. I know that there are wait lists for some of the programs but they are not nearly as long as I would expect given that there are parents who are so invested in finding a "good" peer group for their kids.

We are in LI and know parents who have kids in the LI program and Gen Ed program. Those parents tell us that the expectations and behaviors in the two groups are really, really different.

Why is the focus for so many parents on AAP when there are other options that start earlier and provide kids with additional academic challenge and a better peer group?

As someone who's had multiple kids go through AAP, I can answer this question for you. First, I have no idea what language immersion is. Second, I imagine it would require bussing my kids to some random school far away (I chose local Level IV... I don't even want an AAP center). Third, I care about math and technical skills, not languages. My kids are already multiligual at home and there is virtually no economic value to speaking multiple languages

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. What is the point for elementary and middle when anyone can take AP in high school? It also seems like unless you have a goal for TJ, there really is no actual purpose earlier on... My child got accepted and will be starting this year but I am still boggled on whether it’s actually worth something so early on. Would love feedback on what you feel your child gained from the program overall...Or if they gained anything at all?

The biggest point is a better peer group, the rest is fluff.

Then why don't more parents look at the Language immersion programs? There is a self selection process that tends to lead to kids who do not have learning issues or major behavior issues in the LI classes and parents who are more engaged in their kids education. The level of differentiation tends to be less drastic because of the kids in the program. I know that there are wait lists for some of the programs but they are not nearly as long as I would expect given that there are parents who are so invested in finding a "good" peer group for their kids.

We are in LI and know parents who have kids in the LI program and Gen Ed program. Those parents tell us that the expectations and behaviors in the two groups are really, really different.

Why is the focus for so many parents on AAP when there are other options that start earlier and provide kids with additional academic challenge and a better peer group?

As someone who's had multiple kids go through AAP, I can answer this question for you. First, I have no idea what language immersion is. Second, I imagine it would require bussing my kids to some random school far away (I chose local Level IV... I don't even want an AAP center). Third, I care about math and technical skills, not languages. My kids are already multiligual at home and there is virtually no economic value to speaking multiple languages

We choose to stay at our base as well, we didn't want to move to the Center. I understand that parents might not be interested in LI because of the language issue. You do have to drive your kid to a school if it isn't your base. But if the argument for AAP is a better cohort of kids, then that would hold for LI. Just curious because it effectively does the same thing as AAP by grouping kids with involved parents who are reasonably well behaved and tend to have far fewer learning issues yet parents who seem to fully know about AAP don't look at a different option that does the same thing but starts in 1rst grade. You can leave to go to AAP in 3rd if you want, some LI programs have LLIV and kids do both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. What is the point for elementary and middle when anyone can take AP in high school? It also seems like unless you have a goal for TJ, there really is no actual purpose earlier on... My child got accepted and will be starting this year but I am still boggled on whether it’s actually worth something so early on. Would love feedback on what you feel your child gained from the program overall...Or if they gained anything at all?

The biggest point is a better peer group, the rest is fluff.

Then why don't more parents look at the Language immersion programs? There is a self selection process that tends to lead to kids who do not have learning issues or major behavior issues in the LI classes and parents who are more engaged in their kids education. The level of differentiation tends to be less drastic because of the kids in the program. I know that there are wait lists for some of the programs but they are not nearly as long as I would expect given that there are parents who are so invested in finding a "good" peer group for their kids.

We are in LI and know parents who have kids in the LI program and Gen Ed program. Those parents tell us that the expectations and behaviors in the two groups are really, really different.

Why is the focus for so many parents on AAP when there are other options that start earlier and provide kids with additional academic challenge and a better peer group?

I personally do not like LI programs. Actually I strongly dislike them. I want my kids educated well in English.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. What is the point for elementary and middle when anyone can take AP in high school? It also seems like unless you have a goal for TJ, there really is no actual purpose earlier on... My child got accepted and will be starting this year but I am still boggled on whether it’s actually worth something so early on. Would love feedback on what you feel your child gained from the program overall...Or if they gained anything at all?

The biggest point is a better peer group, the rest is fluff.

Then why don't more parents look at the Language immersion programs? There is a self selection process that tends to lead to kids who do not have learning issues or major behavior issues in the LI classes and parents who are more engaged in their kids education. The level of differentiation tends to be less drastic because of the kids in the program. I know that there are wait lists for some of the programs but they are not nearly as long as I would expect given that there are parents who are so invested in finding a "good" peer group for their kids.

We are in LI and know parents who have kids in the LI program and Gen Ed program. Those parents tell us that the expectations and behaviors in the two groups are really, really different.

Why is the focus for so many parents on AAP when there are other options that start earlier and provide kids with additional academic challenge and a better peer group?

As someone who's had multiple kids go through AAP, I can answer this question for you. First, I have no idea what language immersion is. Second, I imagine it would require bussing my kids to some random school far away (I chose local Level IV... I don't even want an AAP center). Third, I care about math and technical skills, not languages. My kids are already multiligual at home and there is virtually no economic value to speaking multiple languages

We choose to stay at our base as well, we didn't want to move to the Center. I understand that parents might not be interested in LI because of the language issue. You do have to drive your kid to a school if it isn't your base. But if the argument for AAP is a better cohort of kids, then that would hold for LI. Just curious because it effectively does the same thing as AAP by grouping kids with involved parents who are reasonably well behaved and tend to have far fewer learning issues yet parents who seem to fully know about AAP don't look at a different option that does the same thing but starts in 1rst grade. You can leave to go to AAP in 3rd if you want, some LI programs have LLIV and kids do both.

Many people don’t know about the LI programs, have logistical problems with driving their kids to school, are located far from any LI programs, or don’t realize how far behind some kids are and how bad the behavior problems are in their base schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. What is the point for elementary and middle when anyone can take AP in high school? It also seems like unless you have a goal for TJ, there really is no actual purpose earlier on... My child got accepted and will be starting this year but I am still boggled on whether it’s actually worth something so early on. Would love feedback on what you feel your child gained from the program overall...Or if they gained anything at all?

The biggest point is a better peer group, the rest is fluff.

Then why don't more parents look at the Language immersion programs? There is a self selection process that tends to lead to kids who do not have learning issues or major behavior issues in the LI classes and parents who are more engaged in their kids education. The level of differentiation tends to be less drastic because of the kids in the program. I know that there are wait lists for some of the programs but they are not nearly as long as I would expect given that there are parents who are so invested in finding a "good" peer group for their kids.

We are in LI and know parents who have kids in the LI program and Gen Ed program. Those parents tell us that the expectations and behaviors in the two groups are really, really different.

Why is the focus for so many parents on AAP when there are other options that start earlier and provide kids with additional academic challenge and a better peer group?

I personally do not like LI programs. Actually I strongly dislike them. I want my kids educated well in English.

Same. LI results in sub-par English teaching and does not result in fluency in the other language. Other than the cohort of students, I don't see a benefit at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's all about distributing high achieving kids more equally across the county. For example, Louise Archer was a below-average to average rank (on Great Schools). Make it an AAP center packed with high-achieving kids an voila - it's a Great Schools 10. Parents moving into the area don't know that it's because of the center, but they see the 10, buy a house and add their high-achieving kids to the mix. Over time, the entire neighborhood turns over and a somewhat "undesirable" school has become highly sought after.

Not as true now that almost every school has AAP, but I believe this was the original plan.

Nice try but Louise Archer has a Great Schools rating of 6.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Creating this kind of competitive educational system also does one more thing: instead of teaching 1-4 different levels of kids in one class at a school, it’s down to about 1-2 for gen Ed and and AAP. It is a little easier for teachers. And I think helpful is raising kids up without lowering kids down.

In theory, that's how it should work. In practice, they aren't really looking at the kids' achievement levels when deciding whether they are admitted to AAP, and they aren't looking at the reading or math levels that can be accommodated in the base school. My DD: perfect reading SOL every single year. Always at the maxed out DRA of 1 year above grade level. Rejected from AAP and frequently unable to be placed in a reading group at her level because there weren't any other kids reading a year above in gen ed. At least 2 years had to repeat info from the previous year due to being "folded down" into a lower reading group. Despite screwing over my DD, the teacher still had 4 grade levels to differentiate across, ranging from 3 years below grade level to on grade level.

My DS: Attended the center. Was reading 2 years above grade level. The teacher met with his group at most 15 minutes per week because there was a below grade level reading group and an on grade level reading group in AAP. The teacher still had 4 levels to differentiate across, ranging from 1 year below through 2 years above. The teacher was pressured to focus on the below kids at the expense of the above kids.

So glad they stopped that above group/below group stuff at our center school.

There shouldn't be any below or on grade level instruction in an Advanced Academics program. All instruction should be above grade level, and parents should withdraw their children from the program if they can't handle this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. What is the point for elementary and middle when anyone can take AP in high school? It also seems like unless you have a goal for TJ, there really is no actual purpose earlier on... My child got accepted and will be starting this year but I am still boggled on whether it’s actually worth something so early on. Would love feedback on what you feel your child gained from the program overall...Or if they gained anything at all?

The biggest point is a better peer group, the rest is fluff.

Then why don't more parents look at the Language immersion programs? There is a self selection process that tends to lead to kids who do not have learning issues or major behavior issues in the LI classes and parents who are more engaged in their kids education. The level of differentiation tends to be less drastic because of the kids in the program. I know that there are wait lists for some of the programs but they are not nearly as long as I would expect given that there are parents who are so invested in finding a "good" peer group for their kids.

We are in LI and know parents who have kids in the LI program and Gen Ed program. Those parents tell us that the expectations and behaviors in the two groups are really, really different.

Why is the focus for so many parents on AAP when there are other options that start earlier and provide kids with additional academic challenge and a better peer group?

I personally do not like LI programs. Actually I strongly dislike them. I want my kids educated well in English.

Same. LI results in sub-par English teaching and does not result in fluency in the other language. Other than the cohort of students, I don't see a benefit at all.

Did you have a kid in LI and/or teach in the system? What's the opinion re sub-par English based on (I agree re fluency).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all about distributing high achieving kids more equally across the county. For example, Louise Archer was a below-average to average rank (on Great Schools). Make it an AAP center packed with high-achieving kids an voila - it's a Great Schools 10. Parents moving into the area don't know that it's because of the center, but they see the 10, buy a house and add their high-achieving kids to the mix. Over time, the entire neighborhood turns over and a somewhat "undesirable" school has become highly sought after.

Not as true now that almost every school has AAP, but I believe this was the original plan.

Nice try but Louise Archer has a Great Schools rating of 6.

Great schools is just dumb and yes this was the original plan for the center schools in underperforming neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Science nerd mom here. Tax bracket is over 250k.

Yes my kids play sports. Healthy bodies are important to us.

Yes my kids are in AAP. Healthy minds are important to us.

AAP is the only reason why we are in FCPS or living in Fairfax county. We would otherwise live in CA.

AAP exists in part to keep the tax bracket average here high. Without it, a good portion of Fairfax county would just move. It’s very expensive to live here, and honestly without kids we could live in a more affordable area. The tracking works for us.

Creating this kind of competitive educational system also does one more thing: instead of teaching 1-4 different levels of kids in one class at a school, it’s down to about 1-2 for gen Ed and and AAP. It is a little easier for teachers. And I think helpful is raising kids up without lowering kids down.

Do I think it’s fair? The reality is that it is done in other counties/states but not so blatantly and not so much on such a large scale. The other reality is that a lot of parents assume their kids will get in and get mad when their kids don’t get in. So the OPs question gets posted much more often because people become aware of the difference. This is leads to my next observation:

I have one kid who is extremely intelligent (in aap) and another who is not as gifted in math (not in aap). But both do well because they know there is another group of kids who are in the smart class. The awareness that intelligence is awarded is important to them at this age and having local level IV is good.

In that aspect, it’s nice to have AAP. I think if there was a longitudinal study to see the effects of having this separation on overall graduation levels and advanced education in fcps that would most likely be the reason to keep aap vs eliminate it. But my observation is that it is good for our kids overall- even if they don’t get into aap.

But it IS lowering kids down. AAP kids frequently act entitled and like they are better than he general Ed kids and are frequently treated that way, too. Our school has a “fusion lab” with really cool stem stuff. My AAP kid is in there frequently and says it’s super fun, but my non-AAP kid has never been in there. The AAP class this year got an extra field trip that the gen ed kids didn’t get. How do you think that makes the gen ed kids feel? Like they’re not good enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. What is the point for elementary and middle when anyone can take AP in high school? It also seems like unless you have a goal for TJ, there really is no actual purpose earlier on... My child got accepted and will be starting this year but I am still boggled on whether it’s actually worth something so early on. Would love feedback on what you feel your child gained from the program overall...Or if they gained anything at all?

The biggest point is a better peer group, the rest is fluff.

Then why don't more parents look at the Language immersion programs? There is a self selection process that tends to lead to kids who do not have learning issues or major behavior issues in the LI classes and parents who are more engaged in their kids education. The level of differentiation tends to be less drastic because of the kids in the program. I know that there are wait lists for some of the programs but they are not nearly as long as I would expect given that there are parents who are so invested in finding a "good" peer group for their kids.

We are in LI and know parents who have kids in the LI program and Gen Ed program. Those parents tell us that the expectations and behaviors in the two groups are really, really different.

Why is the focus for so many parents on AAP when there are other options that start earlier and provide kids with additional academic challenge and a better peer group?

I personally do not like LI programs. Actually I strongly dislike them. I want my kids educated well in English.

Same. LI results in sub-par English teaching and does not result in fluency in the other language. Other than the cohort of students, I don't see a benefit at all.

Did you have a kid in LI and/or teach in the system? What's the opinion re sub-par English based on (I agree re fluency).

DS is in LI and has been doing fine with English. He Passed Advanced on the SOL in 3 and 4 grade for math and reading. His writing really improved this year. He takes Advanced Math in the language he is learning.

There are kids who struggle with the math or LA because of a decreased amount of time for instruction in order to include the language. Math is taught in the target language which can also cause kids some issues. It is one of the reasons some people drop out of the program. I would guess that a kid who belongs in AAP would not have problem with learning math or LA in the LI environment. Plenty of kids are in these program and do well on exams and in classes in MS.

One of the other things we have enjoyed is that DSs class is decreasing in size. Some kids left for AAP, some because of academic concerns, and some moved away. The only kids who can join the program are kids who are fluent in the target language so while the Gen Ed class has been growing, the LI class is shrinking. As they move into more complex material, they get more time with the Teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all about distributing high achieving kids more equally across the county. For example, Louise Archer was a below-average to average rank (on Great Schools). Make it an AAP center packed with high-achieving kids an voila - it's a Great Schools 10. Parents moving into the area don't know that it's because of the center, but they see the 10, buy a house and add their high-achieving kids to the mix. Over time, the entire neighborhood turns over and a somewhat "undesirable" school has become highly sought after.

Not as true now that almost every school has AAP, but I believe this was the original plan.

Nice try but Louise Archer has a Great Schools rating of 6.

NP and PP quoted is partially correct. I’m a FCPS graduate and my oldest sibling was in the very first cohort of the then-called Gifted and Talented Program begun as (at least a pilot program) in the ES level in the 1975-76 school year. It was slightly contentious with the parents-a large group of parents was concerned about separating young children from their “regular” or assigned classroom peers and discussed having maybe one 5th or 6th grade class remain as a GT class the entire year. Instead, at least at our neighborhood ES, the identified GT students (only 5th and 6th or maybe 6th?) were instead pulled out of class and met altogether in one classroom for a few hours for enrichment activities.

My parents were relieved as they were worried that my sibling would be among less “well-rounded” or extremely studious types which back in the 70s, were less accepted and prone to bullying.

I believe the students were identified by their teachers through SRA tests, report card grades and maybe a separate IQ test.

Also, this era, the late 70s was a time of population flux in pockets of Fairfax County - many ES schools were slated for closure and/or consolidation. Louise Archer was one, as was Cedar Lane ES. The arrival and expansion of the GT program then single-handedly saved Louise Archer from closing. Cedar Lane became pre of an alternative school.

To bolster from ebbs and flows of FCPS population, note each and every FCPES had a niche; AAP, Cat B classroom, hearing impaired education, Language Immersion, a performing arts designation, SACC, Headstart, Preschool, off the top of my head. AAP is an outgrowth of GT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Science nerd mom here. Tax bracket is over 250k.

Yes my kids play sports. Healthy bodies are important to us.

Yes my kids are in AAP. Healthy minds are important to us.

AAP is the only reason why we are in FCPS or living in Fairfax county. We would otherwise live in CA.

AAP exists in part to keep the tax bracket average here high. Without it, a good portion of Fairfax county would just move. It’s very expensive to live here, and honestly without kids we could live in a more affordable area. The tracking works for us.

Creating this kind of competitive educational system also does one more thing: instead of teaching 1-4 different levels of kids in one class at a school, it’s down to about 1-2 for gen Ed and and AAP. It is a little easier for teachers. And I think helpful is raising kids up without lowering kids down.

Do I think it’s fair? The reality is that it is done in other counties/states but not so blatantly and not so much on such a large scale. The other reality is that a lot of parents assume their kids will get in and get mad when their kids don’t get in. So the OPs question gets posted much more often because people become aware of the difference. This is leads to my next observation:

I have one kid who is extremely intelligent (in aap) and another who is not as gifted in math (not in aap). But both do well because they know there is another group of kids who are in the smart class. The awareness that intelligence is awarded is important to them at this age and having local level IV is good.

In that aspect, it’s nice to have AAP. I think if there was a longitudinal study to see the effects of having this separation on overall graduation levels and advanced education in fcps that would most likely be the reason to keep aap vs eliminate it. But my observation is that it is good for our kids overall- even if they don’t get into aap.

But it IS lowering kids down. AAP kids frequently act entitled and like they are better than he general Ed kids and are frequently treated that way, too. Our school has a “fusion lab” with really cool stem stuff. My AAP kid is in there frequently and says it’s super fun, but my non-AAP kid has never been in there. The AAP class this year got an extra field trip that the gen ed kids didn’t get. How do you think that makes the gen ed kids feel? Like they’re not good enough.

Oh well. Life's not fair. Those AAP kids will also be getting higher salaries and live in nicer neighborhoods. Or do you think all of society should convert to socialism?