FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

Nah. I like DC in the top 10-20% group rather than the other 98% that a small GT model would provide. The other 98% 20 years ago is much different than it is now.

In other words, you know your kid isn't gifted, you just like the *idea* of it. We know. Thanks for a perfect illustration of why AAP is so absurd.
Unless that was satire, in which case, bravo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

I can't believe you are arguing this.

AAP is FCPS' gifted program as detailed in the "FCPS Local Plan for the Gifted 2022-2027" as required by the State of Virginia.

Here is the link to the PDF in Board Focs.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/CKU3K4072A18/$file/Web%20Accessible%20Local%20Plan%20for%20the%20Gifted%202022-2027_f.pdf

The document mentions multiple times that AAP is FCPS' gifted program.

Regardless of the minutia of who and what you think constitutes a "gifted" student, and back to the original point of refuting the argument the original poster made that FCPS should removed ESL and 504/IEP kids from the mainstream classroom, eliminate AAP and replace the ESL/504/IEP kids with the former AAP kids, that cannot happen because it will violate federal law.

If FCPS even attempts to do what she wants, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Of the 3 groups of special ed students of AAP, 504/IEP and ESL (all 3 classified as Special Education by Virginia law) the only one of the three that can legally be moved into specialized classrooms are the gifted students (designated as AAP based on the Plan for the Gifted submitted to Virginia by FCPS)

[Anonymous]

check out what the AAP classroom teacher roles are advertised as: "gifted education teacher."

AAP is how FCPS meets the state mandate to provide gifted education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

Nah. I like DC in the top 10-20% group rather than the other 98% that a small GT model would provide. The other 98% 20 years ago is much different than it is now.

In other words, you know your kid isn't gifted, you just like the *idea* of it. We know. Thanks for a perfect illustration of why AAP is so absurd.
Unless that was satire, in which case, bravo.

Oh yeah they aren’t gifted. But they are pretty smart. High scores and at a great center with a great teacher and student cohort. Just an exceptional educational experience. I don’t care whether people think he’s gifted. I care that he is learning and is having a very positive experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

I can't believe you are arguing this.

AAP is FCPS' gifted program as detailed in the "FCPS Local Plan for the Gifted 2022-2027" as required by the State of Virginia.

Here is the link to the PDF in Board Focs.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/CKU3K4072A18/$file/Web%20Accessible%20Local%20Plan%20for%20the%20Gifted%202022-2027_f.pdf

The document mentions multiple times that AAP is FCPS' gifted program.

Regardless of the minutia of who and what you think constitutes a "gifted" student, and back to the original point of refuting the argument the original poster made that FCPS should removed ESL and 504/IEP kids from the mainstream classroom, eliminate AAP and replace the ESL/504/IEP kids with the former AAP kids, that cannot happen because it will violate federal law.

If FCPS even attempts to do what she wants, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Of the 3 groups of special ed students of AAP, 504/IEP and ESL (all 3 classified as Special Education by Virginia law) the only one of the three that can legally be moved into specialized classrooms are the gifted students (designated as AAP based on the Plan for the Gifted submitted to Virginia by FCPS)

DP. You said all this before and are just repeating yourself now.

You cannot seriously contend that FCPS can only satisfy its obligations under state law by continuing to operate AAP in its current form. It’s very clear other jurisdictions satisfy those obligations through programs that do not entail the creation of a bloated, formal two-track system that distorts school boundaries and enrollments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

Nah. I like DC in the top 10-20% group rather than the other 98% that a small GT model would provide. The other 98% 20 years ago is much different than it is now.

+1 the parents who want to burn down the entire program because their kid can't even make it into an expanded version of an advanced learners program is really really lame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

Nah. I like DC in the top 10-20% group rather than the other 98% that a small GT model would provide. The other 98% 20 years ago is much different than it is now.

+1 the parents who want to burn down the entire program because their kid can't even make it into an expanded version of an advanced learners program is really really lame.

Or, maybe they have a gifted kid and want only other gifted kids in the program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

I can't believe you are arguing this.

AAP is FCPS' gifted program as detailed in the "FCPS Local Plan for the Gifted 2022-2027" as required by the State of Virginia.

Here is the link to the PDF in Board Focs.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/CKU3K4072A18/$file/Web%20Accessible%20Local%20Plan%20for%20the%20Gifted%202022-2027_f.pdf

The document mentions multiple times that AAP is FCPS' gifted program.

Regardless of the minutia of who and what you think constitutes a "gifted" student, and back to the original point of refuting the argument the original poster made that FCPS should removed ESL and 504/IEP kids from the mainstream classroom, eliminate AAP and replace the ESL/504/IEP kids with the former AAP kids, that cannot happen because it will violate federal law.

If FCPS even attempts to do what she wants, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Of the 3 groups of special ed students of AAP, 504/IEP and ESL (all 3 classified as Special Education by Virginia law) the only one of the three that can legally be moved into specialized classrooms are the gifted students (designated as AAP based on the Plan for the Gifted submitted to Virginia by FCPS)

DP. You said all this before and are just repeating yourself now.

You cannot seriously contend that FCPS can only satisfy its obligations under state law by continuing to operate AAP in its current form. It’s very clear other jurisdictions satisfy those obligations through programs that do not entail the creation of a bloated, formal two-track system that distorts school boundaries and enrollments.

You are not reading what I wrote.

I never said that in any of my posts.

If you read what I wrote, instead of just going to the "cancel AAP" screed, you would see that everything I am writing is 100% correct. My only points are that AAP falls under special ed as designated by FCPS Plan for the Gifted based on the Virginia gifted special education laws, just like 504/IEPs and ESL are classified as special ed, and of the 3 special ed groups, AAP is the only one that can legally be segregated into a special program. It is illegal, based on federal law to segregate 504/IEP students and ESL students, based on Least Restrictive Environment, but perfectly legal to segregate gifted students to fulfill Least Restrictive Environment for the gifted kids. (in this case AAP students based off FCPS designation of who qualified for gifted in their 2022-2027 Plan for the Gifted)

FCPS designated AAP as their gifted program, at least until 2027. Rezoning is happening in 2025. If you want to blow up AAP, you need to wait until after the first round of rezoning.

If you want to push to move the ESL kids out to a special school. Or the 504/IEP kids to self-contained classrooms and out of your kids mainstream class, you are out of luck.

What you want is illegal.

Those 2 groups are protected by special ed federal laws. Gifted Ed is protected by Virginia law, and FCPS Plan for the Gifted, at least until 2027. All 3 have LRE protections, which mean different things to these students on an individual level.

You cannot move ESL and 504/IEP kidsout of your kids class even if it makes sense. AAP kids are the only group of special ed kids who can legally be separated.

Should they be segregated? I am not arguing that and can see benefits and drawbacks to both scenarios. But I am not arguing "should" AAP be segregated. I am explaining "why" AAP is able to be segregated, when the other 2 special ed groups can not be legally segregated except under very specific, individual level LRE situations for the most severe cases.

If you want FCPS to change AAP classifications, focus on the 2028-33 document process and attack cemters the next rezoning cycle in 2029.

Give up on the segregation of ESL kids, unless you can lobby your federal reps to change the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

Nah. I like DC in the top 10-20% group rather than the other 98% that a small GT model would provide. The other 98% 20 years ago is much different than it is now.

+1 the parents who want to burn down the entire program because their kid can't even make it into an expanded version of an advanced learners program is really really lame.

Or, maybe they have a gifted kid and want only other gifted kids in the program.

Nah, the ones complaining are very vocal about their kids being made fun of for not getting in. It's bitterness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

Nah. I like DC in the top 10-20% group rather than the other 98% that a small GT model would provide. The other 98% 20 years ago is much different than it is now.

+1 the parents who want to burn down the entire program because their kid can't even make it into an expanded version of an advanced learners program is really really lame.

Or, maybe they have a gifted kid and want only other gifted kids in the program.

Nah, the ones complaining are very vocal about their kids being made fun of for not getting in. It's bitterness.

Not surprisingly, you are wrong. I posted that and I am not one of the parents you are talking about.
Retired teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

I can't believe you are arguing this.

AAP is FCPS' gifted program as detailed in the "FCPS Local Plan for the Gifted 2022-2027" as required by the State of Virginia.

Here is the link to the PDF in Board Focs.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/CKU3K4072A18/$file/Web%20Accessible%20Local%20Plan%20for%20the%20Gifted%202022-2027_f.pdf

The document mentions multiple times that AAP is FCPS' gifted program.

Regardless of the minutia of who and what you think constitutes a "gifted" student, and back to the original point of refuting the argument the original poster made that FCPS should removed ESL and 504/IEP kids from the mainstream classroom, eliminate AAP and replace the ESL/504/IEP kids with the former AAP kids, that cannot happen because it will violate federal law.

If FCPS even attempts to do what she wants, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Of the 3 groups of special ed students of AAP, 504/IEP and ESL (all 3 classified as Special Education by Virginia law) the only one of the three that can legally be moved into specialized classrooms are the gifted students (designated as AAP based on the Plan for the Gifted submitted to Virginia by FCPS)

DP. You said all this before and are just repeating yourself now.

You cannot seriously contend that FCPS can only satisfy its obligations under state law by continuing to operate AAP in its current form. It’s very clear other jurisdictions satisfy those obligations through programs that do not entail the creation of a bloated, formal two-track system that distorts school boundaries and enrollments.

You are not reading what I wrote.

I never said that in any of my posts.

If you read what I wrote, instead of just going to the "cancel AAP" screed, you would see that everything I am writing is 100% correct. My only points are that AAP falls under special ed as designated by FCPS Plan for the Gifted based on the Virginia gifted special education laws, just like 504/IEPs and ESL are classified as special ed, and of the 3 special ed groups, AAP is the only one that can legally be segregated into a special program. It is illegal, based on federal law to segregate 504/IEP students and ESL students, based on Least Restrictive Environment, but perfectly legal to segregate gifted students to fulfill Least Restrictive Environment for the gifted kids. (in this case AAP students based off FCPS designation of who qualified for gifted in their 2022-2027 Plan for the Gifted)

FCPS designated AAP as their gifted program, at least until 2027. Rezoning is happening in 2025. If you want to blow up AAP, you need to wait until after the first round of rezoning.

If you want to push to move the ESL kids out to a special school. Or the 504/IEP kids to self-contained classrooms and out of your kids mainstream class, you are out of luck.

What you want is illegal.

Those 2 groups are protected by special ed federal laws. Gifted Ed is protected by Virginia law, and FCPS Plan for the Gifted, at least until 2027. All 3 have LRE protections, which mean different things to these students on an individual level.

You cannot move ESL and 504/IEP kidsout of your kids class even if it makes sense. AAP kids are the only group of special ed kids who can legally be separated.

Should they be segregated? I am not arguing that and can see benefits and drawbacks to both scenarios. But I am not arguing "should" AAP be segregated. I am explaining "why" AAP is able to be segregated, when the other 2 special ed groups can not be legally segregated except under very specific, individual level LRE situations for the most severe cases.

If you want FCPS to change AAP classifications, focus on the 2028-33 document process and attack cemters the next rezoning cycle in 2029.

Give up on the segregation of ESL kids, unless you can lobby your federal reps to change the law.

Could you be a bigger bore? All people have said is that FCPS should have landed on the future of AAP - how LLIV services are delivered - before it undertook a comprehensive boundary review. In the vernacular, they are putting the cart before the horse.

It’s a shame that they no doubt put people like you on the BRAC. FCPS is so screwed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

Nah. I like DC in the top 10-20% group rather than the other 98% that a small GT model would provide. The other 98% 20 years ago is much different than it is now.

+1 the parents who want to burn down the entire program because their kid can't even make it into an expanded version of an advanced learners program is really really lame.

Or, maybe they have a gifted kid and want only other gifted kids in the program.

Nah, the ones complaining are very vocal about their kids being made fun of for not getting in. It's bitterness.

Not surprisingly, you are wrong. I posted that and I am not one of the parents you are talking about.
Retired teacher.

Posted what? Parents on DCUM complain constantly about their kid not getting in so its unfair. Every post that mentions AAP has a parent come to make this very complaint. So you're wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The original GT model was not a "tiny GT program in each school." It was a center-based model, but far fewer kids participated. Springfield Estates was one of the first, if not the first, schools in FCPS where GT kids were sent.

These kids were truly gifted. AAP is not the same. The idea was kind of like the old TJ model. The kids learned quickly and moved much faster. There may have been speech therapy, but there were no other special needs.

Though, I have never understood how it was okay to pull out gifted kids into a "special class," but we had to mainstream the other end of the spectrum with our GenEd kids.

Get rid of centers. Smart kids will still be smart. If we can "mainstream" struggling students, we can certainly mainstream high achievers.

You are completely wrong

The highest IQ kids have disproportionately high behavior related special needs such as ADHD, Aspergers, and general behavior problems.

The highest IQ kids tend to have many struggles in school and a higher amount of failure to launch than the general population and your average smart "good student"

That is why gifted programs exist.

Not for the well behaved bright kid that turns everything in and makes teachers happy. They exist for the boy with the 150 IQ that won't quit arguing with classmates and interrupting the teacher, the girl with the 140 IQ who keeps crying because she can't do her work unless it is perfect, and the kid with a photographic memory that doesn't turn in their homework and spends class sneaking books and math games because they know the answers before being taught.

A class full of "truly gifted" kids is going to have way more behavior problems and special needs than a regular classroom.

Once more: AAP is NOT a "gifted program." And, if there are so many kids with special needs, then shouldn't they be mainstreamed? It makes no sense.

Gifted is a different kind of special ed.

You are being irrational.

The hurt and fixation over your kid not qualifying for AAP wanes around 5th grade, and disappears by middle/high school

You don't rezone over hurt feelings.

DP. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but your continued assertion that G&T is just a form of special ed is a laughable assertion. Sure, you can find examples of kids acting out in G&T, but it’s frankly absurd to equate the two. I suspect that you’re just intentionally trying to provoke others.

You don't know Virginia education law.

It has nothing to do what my opinion is.

By Virginia law, 8 VAC 20-40-60A , [u]giftededucation is classified under special education.[i]

It doesn't matter what your opinion or my opinion is, it is state law.

Gifted education is the only special ed that can be broadly fulfilled by separate, segregated classes.

Virginia schools cannot, by federal law, pull ESL or IEP/504 kids from the mainstream classrooms. It violates least restrictive environment. If they try to, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Gifted education can be segregated, because the AAP classes are the least restrictive environment.

FCPS would be better served by making sure each pyramid has an independent AAP program, before rezoning or eliminating AAP.

https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/specialized-instruction/gifted-education

DP. Once again, AAP is NOT a gifted program. Nowhere on the AAP page is the word "gifted" even used. They clearly state that AAP is for "advanced learners" - deliberately not using the "gifted" descriptor. I would actually prefer FCPS had a (very small) GT program, like the one they used to have, and then have advanced groupings open to ALL kids. Many/most Gen Ed kids are advanced in at least one subject - they should have the opportunity to excel as well.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

I can't believe you are arguing this.

AAP is FCPS' gifted program as detailed in the "FCPS Local Plan for the Gifted 2022-2027" as required by the State of Virginia.

Here is the link to the PDF in Board Focs.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/CKU3K4072A18/$file/Web%20Accessible%20Local%20Plan%20for%20the%20Gifted%202022-2027_f.pdf

The document mentions multiple times that AAP is FCPS' gifted program.

Regardless of the minutia of who and what you think constitutes a "gifted" student, and back to the original point of refuting the argument the original poster made that FCPS should removed ESL and 504/IEP kids from the mainstream classroom, eliminate AAP and replace the ESL/504/IEP kids with the former AAP kids, that cannot happen because it will violate federal law.

If FCPS even attempts to do what she wants, FCPS will get sued and lose.

Of the 3 groups of special ed students of AAP, 504/IEP and ESL (all 3 classified as Special Education by Virginia law) the only one of the three that can legally be moved into specialized classrooms are the gifted students (designated as AAP based on the Plan for the Gifted submitted to Virginia by FCPS)

DP. You said all this before and are just repeating yourself now.

You cannot seriously contend that FCPS can only satisfy its obligations under state law by continuing to operate AAP in its current form. It’s very clear other jurisdictions satisfy those obligations through programs that do not entail the creation of a bloated, formal two-track system that distorts school boundaries and enrollments.

You are not reading what I wrote.

I never said that in any of my posts.

If you read what I wrote, instead of just going to the "cancel AAP" screed, you would see that everything I am writing is 100% correct. My only points are that AAP falls under special ed as designated by FCPS Plan for the Gifted based on the Virginia gifted special education laws, just like 504/IEPs and ESL are classified as special ed, and of the 3 special ed groups, AAP is the only one that can legally be segregated into a special program. It is illegal, based on federal law to segregate 504/IEP students and ESL students, based on Least Restrictive Environment, but perfectly legal to segregate gifted students to fulfill Least Restrictive Environment for the gifted kids. (in this case AAP students based off FCPS designation of who qualified for gifted in their 2022-2027 Plan for the Gifted)

FCPS designated AAP as their gifted program, at least until 2027. Rezoning is happening in 2025. If you want to blow up AAP, you need to wait until after the first round of rezoning.

If you want to push to move the ESL kids out to a special school. Or the 504/IEP kids to self-contained classrooms and out of your kids mainstream class, you are out of luck.

What you want is illegal.

Those 2 groups are protected by special ed federal laws. Gifted Ed is protected by Virginia law, and FCPS Plan for the Gifted, at least until 2027. All 3 have LRE protections, which mean different things to these students on an individual level.

You cannot move ESL and 504/IEP kidsout of your kids class even if it makes sense. AAP kids are the only group of special ed kids who can legally be separated.

Should they be segregated? I am not arguing that and can see benefits and drawbacks to both scenarios. But I am not arguing "should" AAP be segregated. I am explaining "why" AAP is able to be segregated, when the other 2 special ed groups can not be legally segregated except under very specific, individual level LRE situations for the most severe cases.

If you want FCPS to change AAP classifications, focus on the 2028-33 document process and attack cemters the next rezoning cycle in 2029.

Give up on the segregation of ESL kids, unless you can lobby your federal reps to change the law.

If they changed the current AAP approach they could come up with a new plan and submit that to VDOE. The state doesn’t lock them into a five-year plan with no modifications through 2027.

However, by revising boundaries without first considering the future of AAP in FCPS they are arguably locking themselves into the current AAP model for another five years since some boundaries may reflect whether schools are centers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:check out what the AAP classroom teacher roles are advertised as: "gifted education teacher."

AAP is how FCPS meets the state mandate to provide gifted education.

This is true but AAP includes gifted student. It is not exclusively for gifted students.

Sadly, today’s AAP program expectations were yesterday’s general ed expectations. 🤷‍♀️

[Anonymous]

+1 the parents who want to burn down the entire program because their kid can't even make it into an expanded version of an advanced learners program is really really lame.


Or, maybe they have a gifted kid and want only other gifted kids in the program.


Nah, the ones complaining are very vocal about their kids being made fun of for not getting in. It's bitterness.


Not surprisingly, you are wrong. I posted that and I am not one of the parents you are talking about.
Retired teacher.



Posted what? Parents on DCUM complain constantly about their kid not getting in so its unfair. Every post that mentions AAP has a parent come to make this very complaint. So you're wrong