New Budget Recommendations -- eliminate AAP busing and centers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would have thought the folks on this board would be very, very upset about these recommendations. I certainly am. Now is the time to write letters to Dr. Garza & the School Board mentioning how important the AAP is to our kids, so they know parents support this program. No, it's not perfect by a long shot, but look at the recommendations, and their consequences: (1) cut busing to AAP where there's LLIV -- this hurts working families who can't provide their own transportation, and keeps everybody at their local schools regardless of whether that's best for the child. Stop pretending LLIV is the same as a Center. It's not. Even in wealthier areas, no elementary school has the kind of "critical mass" that Centers have. It's not the same. Perhaps the middle schools in our wealthier areas have "critical mass," but at the elementary level it's just not the case. More to the point, who's hurt by this? The very population who have historically been underrepresented in AAP -- kids from less privileged backgrounds. Rich moms & dads will find a way to get their kid to the Center if their kid needs it. It's the rest of the families who will be screwed. (2) have LLIV everywhere, no centers. That would honestly not be an AAP. The whole philosophy behind FCPS' current AAP is to gather together similar kids so they can support one another. It's the right approach, and it's been used as a model elsewhere; FCPS just did a study on our AAP in 2013, so they know this. Eliminating LLIV is just leaving kids where they are and pretending that we're providing services for them.

As other posters have mentioned, the so-called savings from either of these proposals don't even make sense. You've got to bus kids SOMEWHERE in elementary school... does it make sense that there are massive savings when you shift that bus from one school to another? This screws up all the capital planning the Board has done for years and likely means more trailers.... is that in the "savings?" If you have LLIV everywhere, don't we need more teachers to immediately be trained to educate AAP kids? Isn't that expensive?

Get mad, guys.

FCPS does not care if you're mad. They closed down a little elementary school a couple years ago with no second thoughts. FCPS does not really care about
kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which proves some schools are giving AAP materials to their general ed students already.

Which explains why some of us are desperate to keep our centers and others don't see the point of centers at all. All politics is local.

What I don't get is why parents worry so much about all of this. Caesar's English or other "AAP materials" are no more a magic bullet or shortcut to a leg up in learning than AAP is. Smart kids and involved parents seek out enrichment. All this whining on this thread or another about coding being offered at AAP when any kid with an interest can teach himself or herself.

It is all much ado about nothing.

Why is it okay for your kid to get it and not mine?

It is a fidelity of implementation issue. It has nothing to do with another kid's parent.

Fidelity of implementation is a perennial problem with a school district that is as large and diverse as FCPS. I am not sure how you solve it as what is best practice in one school community might not be in another and having a cookie cutter one sized fits all policy would also be problematic.

The way to solve this problem is to simply offer the best, most advanced curriculum to all kids. Here in FCPS, most are perfectly capable of this work. Those who are not could then be grouped accordingly. This division down some arbitrary line into two groups is ludicrous. FCPS should be organized like a Venn diagram, in which the middle, overlapping section is huge (full of kids of similar ability), and the sections on either side (representing lower and higher abilities) are tiny.

But site based management means what happens at one school could (or could not) occur at another.

It is a structural problem of consistency and oversight.

In short -- principals can do whatever they want without enforcement from above.

Then this should change as well. There are a lot of things within FCPS that need to change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many kids could not handle the AAP program materials all the time if we have so many students in ESOL, special ed, and failing SOL tests. Do the people who post that all FCPS kids can handle AAP all live in Mclean? Yes the level 3 and level 2 kids can handle the AAP materials wherever they are strong. This is happening at many schools already either through pull outs, differentiation in general, compacted math, or LLIV push in. All of the Mclean schools teach advanced academics to many more students beyond just the AAP kids.

Not just McLean - Great Falls and Vienna too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many kids could not handle the AAP program materials all the time if we have so many students in ESOL, special ed, and failing SOL tests. Do the people who post that all FCPS kids can handle AAP all live in Mclean? Yes the level 3 and level 2 kids can handle the AAP materials wherever they are strong. This is happening at many schools already either through pull outs, differentiation in general, compacted math, or LLIV push in. All of the Mclean schools teach advanced academics to many more students beyond just the AAP kids.

Students are not in separate silos of AAP, special Ed, ESOL and gen Ed. Some can be a mix of all four.

+100
Which is why it's mind-boggling that FCPS sees fit to divide students into two groups. Instead of all the different Levels (I, II, III, IV) B.S., which no one really understands or implements consistently, just offer the best, highest quality curriculum to all, as previously suggested. Those who need help would have help, but the vast majority of kids would be just fine. AAP isn't neurosurgery, for crying out loud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, blanket statements about FCPS are difficult as there are many Center schools without the environment received by the PP.

The post you're referring to was not a "blanket statement." It was a description of the specific experience my child (and others at his school) experienced, and as such, is perfectly valid. The point is that if AAP kids don't have to jump through ridiculous hoops in order to switch schools, then no other children should have to either.

But your DC and the AAP kids at the Center are treated EXSCTLY ALIKE. Neither gets to transfer. Cea ter based AAP kids don't get to opt for LLIV, even if it is best for them.

Actually a few center based AAP kids did opt for LLIV at a nearby elementary school because the center wasn't for them.

So nice to know that AAP kids are entitled to a choice between the base school or center. Gotta make sure their every "need" is met, but forget about the needs of GE students.

GE and AAP kids aren't allowed to transfer if the AAP center is their base school. The students that elected to go from their base center school to a LLIV school would have had to submit extra paperwork to prove something beyond AAP needs. I've never heard of this happening, but I suppose it can. Honestly some of the GE parents here are way crazier than the AAP parents with their ridiculous competitive comments. I thought they were supposed to be the normal ones.

You can thank AAP for this divisiveness. This behavior never occurred when the program was GT and only accepted a fraction of the number of kids that AAP currently accepts. Accepting more and more mainstream students, rather than only the few who actually need a special program, is going to cause resentment. There's far too much overlap and too many similarities between the vast majority of AAP and Gen Ed students to make a definitive dividing line between them, and it's no wonder parents (and kids) are sick of it.

we have friends with AAP kids who have recently talked (bragged) about their child's Latin stem homework, and coding homework. How can the rest of us NOT feel like a select group of kids are getting something better than the GE population? My kid had a GBRS of 13 and NNAT and CogAT scores just on the other side of the line (so she is like the 95th percentile).... She could totally do the work, but doesn't get the opportunity.

Well, either you didn't appeal and get a WISC or retest in 3rd or 4th, in which case you have zero room to complain, or you did, in which case a panel of FCPS teachers has decided multiple times that she can't. Besides, lots of PPs are convinced their kids will outperform all the AAP kids in high school-- and that they will take that opportunity to make sure everyone knows how much better their kid is than the former AAP kids. So, clearly their is no academic harm because the GE are going to "win" in the end. And BTW IRL, I have never drawn a distinction between AAP and GE parents-- they were just other parents in my neighborhood or school. Until I started reading the mean spirited crap on this thread. And I have to admit-- now I see a parent in DC's school, and I ask myself-- AAP? GE? I make a point to find out. And if it's a GE parent, I steer clear. Life is too short to spend time around bitter people saying mean things behind my back and rooting for my child to fail.

And I feel exactly the opposite. I steer clear of AAP parents and their kids because of the constant air of superiority and entitlement that surrounds them. It sucks all the air out of the room.

[Anonymous]

And I feel exactly the opposite. I steer clear of AAP parents and their kids because of the constant air of superiority and entitlement that surrounds them. It sucks all the air out of the room.

LOL, get a grip. You obviously haven't met my third grade center kid, who feels entitled only to talk about Minecraft every second. That'll drive you out of the room but will leave the air intact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And I feel exactly the opposite. I steer clear of AAP parents and their kids because of the constant air of superiority and entitlement that surrounds them. It sucks all the air out of the room.

LOL, get a grip. You obviously haven't met my third grade center kid, who feels entitled only to talk about Minecraft every second. That'll drive you out of the room but will leave the air intact.

LOL! Just have to stay away from 23:24's school! Thankfully the majority of AAP Center schools are not like that one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, blanket statements about FCPS are difficult as there are many Center schools without the environment received by the PP.

The post you're referring to was not a "blanket statement." It was a description of the specific experience my child (and others at his school) experienced, and as such, is perfectly valid. The point is that if AAP kids don't have to jump through ridiculous hoops in order to switch schools, then no other children should have to either.

But your DC and the AAP kids at the Center are treated EXSCTLY ALIKE. Neither gets to transfer. Cea ter based AAP kids don't get to opt for LLIV, even if it is best for them.

Actually a few center based AAP kids did opt for LLIV at a nearby elementary school because the center wasn't for them.

So nice to know that AAP kids are entitled to a choice between the base school or center. Gotta make sure their every "need" is met, but forget about the needs of GE students.

GE and AAP kids aren't allowed to transfer if the AAP center is their base school. The students that elected to go from their base center school to a LLIV school would have had to submit extra paperwork to prove something beyond AAP needs. I've never heard of this happening, but I suppose it can. Honestly some of the GE parents here are way crazier than the AAP parents with their ridiculous competitive comments. I thought they were supposed to be the normal ones.

You can thank AAP for this divisiveness. This behavior never occurred when the program was GT and only accepted a fraction of the number of kids that AAP currently accepts. Accepting more and more mainstream students, rather than only the few who actually need a special program, is going to cause resentment. There's far too much overlap and too many similarities between the vast majority of AAP and Gen Ed students to make a definitive dividing line between them, and it's no wonder parents (and kids) are sick of it.

we have friends with AAP kids who have recently talked (bragged) about their child's Latin stem homework, and coding homework. How can the rest of us NOT feel like a select group of kids are getting something better than the GE population? My kid had a GBRS of 13 and NNAT and CogAT scores just on the other side of the line (so she is like the 95th percentile).... She could totally do the work, but doesn't get the opportunity.

Well, either you didn't appeal and get a WISC or retest in 3rd or 4th, in which case you have zero room to complain, or you did, in which case a panel of FCPS teachers has decided multiple times that she can't. Besides, lots of PPs are convinced their kids will outperform all the AAP kids in high school-- and that they will take that opportunity to make sure everyone knows how much better their kid is than the former AAP kids. So, clearly their is no academic harm because the GE are going to "win" in the end. And BTW IRL, I have never drawn a distinction between AAP and GE parents-- they were just other parents in my neighborhood or school. Until I started reading the mean spirited crap on this thread. And I have to admit-- now I see a parent in DC's school, and I ask myself-- AAP? GE? I make a point to find out. And if it's a GE parent, I steer clear. Life is too short to spend time around bitter people saying mean things behind my back and rooting for my child to fail.

And I feel exactly the opposite. I steer clear of AAP parents and their kids because of the constant air of superiority and entitlement that surrounds them. It sucks all the air out of the room.

Wow. That's a lot of bitterness toward a bunch of 8 year olds. Get professional help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many kids could not handle the AAP program materials all the time if we have so many students in ESOL, special ed, and failing SOL tests. Do the people who post that all FCPS kids can handle AAP all live in Mclean? Yes the level 3 and level 2 kids can handle the AAP materials wherever they are strong. This is happening at many schools already either through pull outs, differentiation in general, compacted math, or LLIV push in. All of the Mclean schools teach advanced academics to many more students beyond just the AAP kids.

Students are not in separate silos of AAP, special Ed, ESOL and gen Ed. Some can be a mix of all four.

+100
Which is why it's mind-boggling that FCPS sees fit to divide students into two groups. Instead of all the different Levels (I, II, III, IV) B.S., which no one really understands or implements consistently, just offer the best, highest quality curriculum to all, as previously suggested. Those who need help would have help, but the vast majority of kids would be just fine. AAP isn't neurosurgery, for crying out loud.

FCPS does not divide kids into 2 groups only. There are many kids not ready to take instuction a year above their grade. What is wrong with wanting schools to teach them on level. Not everyone wants an accelerated curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And I feel exactly the opposite. I steer clear of AAP parents and their kids because of the constant air of superiority and entitlement that surrounds them. It sucks all the air out of the room.

LOL, get a grip. You obviously haven't met my third grade center kid, who feels entitled only to talk about Minecraft every second. That'll drive you out of the room but will leave the air intact.

LOL! Just have to stay away from 23:24's school! Thankfully the majority of AAP Center schools are not like that one.

But it was ok for the PP she was responding to to say she avoids GE parents and kids? Okaaaaayyy....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many kids could not handle the AAP program materials all the time if we have so many students in ESOL, special ed, and failing SOL tests. Do the people who post that all FCPS kids can handle AAP all live in Mclean? Yes the level 3 and level 2 kids can handle the AAP materials wherever they are strong. This is happening at many schools already either through pull outs, differentiation in general, compacted math, or LLIV push in. All of the Mclean schools teach advanced academics to many more students beyond just the AAP kids.

Students are not in separate silos of AAP, special Ed, ESOL and gen Ed. Some can be a mix of all four.

+100
Which is why it's mind-boggling that FCPS sees fit to divide students into two groups. Instead of all the different Levels (I, II, III, IV) B.S., which no one really understands or implements consistently, just offer the best, highest quality curriculum to all, as previously suggested. Those who need help would have help, but the vast majority of kids would be just fine. AAP isn't neurosurgery, for crying out loud.

FCPS does not divide kids into 2 groups only. There are many kids not ready to take instuction a year above their grade. What is wrong with wanting schools to teach them on level. Not everyone wants an accelerated curriculum.

AAP is not "instruction a year above grade". Only math is that accelerated - everything else is the same grade-level curriculum, but going a bit deeper into topics. With the exception of math (and plenty of LLIV kids aren't even in AAP math), the AAP curriculum is certainly doable by the vast majority of kids. Our center's principal has been very candid about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And I feel exactly the opposite. I steer clear of AAP parents and their kids because of the constant air of superiority and entitlement that surrounds them. It sucks all the air out of the room.

LOL, get a grip. You obviously haven't met my third grade center kid, who feels entitled only to talk about Minecraft every second. That'll drive you out of the room but will leave the air intact.

LOL! Just have to stay away from 23:24's school! Thankfully the majority of AAP Center schools are not like that one.

But it was ok for the PP she was responding to to say she avoids GE parents and kids? Okaaaaayyy....

Actually, just the GE parents. Most of the kids are really nice. Not their fault their parents are are so jealous and angry that they create a toxic atmosphere.

[Anonymous]

So glad that our Center school doesn't have divisive and hateful parents.

Signed,
parent of kids in AAP and GE at Center school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many kids could not handle the AAP program materials all the time if we have so many students in ESOL, special ed, and failing SOL tests. Do the people who post that all FCPS kids can handle AAP all live in Mclean? Yes the level 3 and level 2 kids can handle the AAP materials wherever they are strong. This is happening at many schools already either through pull outs, differentiation in general, compacted math, or LLIV push in. All of the Mclean schools teach advanced academics to many more students beyond just the AAP kids.

Students are not in separate silos of AAP, special Ed, ESOL and gen Ed. Some can be a mix of all four.

+100
Which is why it's mind-boggling that FCPS sees fit to divide students into two groups. Instead of all the different Levels (I, II, III, IV) B.S., which no one really understands or implements consistently, just offer the best, highest quality curriculum to all, as previously suggested. Those who need help would have help, but the vast majority of kids would be just fine. AAP isn't neurosurgery, for crying out loud.

FCPS does not divide kids into 2 groups only. There are many kids not ready to take instuction a year above their grade. What is wrong with wanting schools to teach them on level. Not everyone wants an accelerated curriculum.

AAP is not "instruction a year above grade". Only math is that accelerated - everything else is the same grade-level curriculum, but going a bit deeper into topics. With the exception of math (and plenty of LLIV kids aren't even in AAP math), the AAP curriculum is certainly doable by the vast majority of kids. Our center's principal has been very candid about this.

Our local parochial school teaches the systems of the body in 4th grade. In FCPS it's taught much later. That doesn't mean the parochial school is ahead of the public school. They just teach a subject a different year. Another science topic is taught earlier in FCPS and later at the parochial school. "Deeper" means "more advanced". Higher level thinking. As you move up in grades, school includes more higher level thinking activities. Not all children can handle "Deeper" and "more advanced" than the standard curriculum nor should they. They should be able to be taught and graded on grade level assignments and not feel like they're behind. The problem is that some schools aren't implementing a LLII and LLIII program for those kids who can't handle a full day of advanced instruction but can handle it at some level. They are only catering to their LLIV students. All students should receive advanced instruction if they can handle it, but it shouldn't be a requirement. You are a at a center school, so I'm going to guess that there aren't a lot of children behind grade level at your school, but many schools do have plenty of children behind grade level and it would do them a disservice to be given advanced work when they first need to master the on grade level work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many kids could not handle the AAP program materials all the time if we have so many students in ESOL, special ed, and failing SOL tests. Do the people who post that all FCPS kids can handle AAP all live in Mclean? Yes the level 3 and level 2 kids can handle the AAP materials wherever they are strong. This is happening at many schools already either through pull outs, differentiation in general, compacted math, or LLIV push in. All of the Mclean schools teach advanced academics to many more students beyond just the AAP kids.

Students are not in separate silos of AAP, special Ed, ESOL and gen Ed. Some can be a mix of all four.

+100
Which is why it's mind-boggling that FCPS sees fit to divide students into two groups. Instead of all the different Levels (I, II, III, IV) B.S., which no one really understands or implements consistently, just offer the best, highest quality curriculum to all, as previously suggested. Those who need help would have help, but the vast majority of kids would be just fine. AAP isn't neurosurgery, for crying out loud.

FCPS does not divide kids into 2 groups only. There are many kids not ready to take instuction a year above their grade. What is wrong with wanting schools to teach them on level. Not everyone wants an accelerated curriculum.

AAP is not "instruction a year above grade". Only math is that accelerated - everything else is the same grade-level curriculum, but going a bit deeper into topics. With the exception of math (and plenty of LLIV kids aren't even in AAP math), the AAP curriculum is certainly doable by the vast majority of kids. Our center's principal has been very candid about this.

Our local parochial school teaches the systems of the body in 4th grade. In FCPS it's taught much later. That doesn't mean the parochial school is ahead of the public school. They just teach a subject a different year. Another science topic is taught earlier in FCPS and later at the parochial school. "Deeper" means "more advanced". Higher level thinking. As you move up in grades, school includes more higher level thinking activities. Not all children can handle "Deeper" and "more advanced" than the standard curriculum nor should they. They should be able to be taught and graded on grade level assignments and not feel like they're behind. The problem is that some schools aren't implementing a LLII and LLIII program for those kids who can't handle a full day of advanced instruction but can handle it at some level. They are only catering to their LLIV students. All students should receive advanced instruction if they can handle it, but it shouldn't be a requirement. You are a at a center school, so I'm going to guess that there aren't a lot of children behind grade level at your school, but many schools do have plenty of children behind grade level and it would do them a disservice to be given advanced work when they first need to master the on grade level work.

What about LLIV kids who aren't in LLIV math? Or conversely, what about those kids who aren't able to keep up with LLIV language arts? Why are they in LLIV to begin with if that program is full-time AAP for kids who are supposedly "advanced" in all four core subjects? Most kids are not advanced across the board, and most kids have one or two subjects they excel in. With flexible grouping, rather than an "either/or" approach, all kids could be met where they are. The current system fails many kids.