Forum Index
»
Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)
FCPS comprehensive boundary review
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Then you should report those posts as off-topic. On the other hand, the current AAP model makes no sense from either a pedagogical or logistical standpoint. You have schools like Cooper and Longfellow that offer AAP only to kids already zoned to those schools. You have mega-AAP centers like Carson and Rocky Run that serve kids who live in multiple pyramids. You have parents at one MS AAP center that serves kids in multiple pyramids (Glasgow) begging for the school to be downsized. And you have many schools that aren’t AAP centers that are well below capacity, in part because they send so many kids to AAP centers. That ought to demand attention, and it could very well affect boundaries if given proper attention. Yet we have posters on here saying “AAP is going to stay the same - suck it.” It is totally ass-backwards. FCPS should decide how it plans to deal with the current anomalies, advise the public, and adjust boundaries as needed. |
Anonymous
It seems like they hate the center schools more than they hate AAP. |
Anonymous
It's still public school. We used to handle the really bright kids by jumping them grade levels. You'd go from Pre-K to 1st grade to 3rd grade to 5th grade. So you'd see a 7 year old in 5th grade that eventually would start high school at 11. But we changed to a GT system that kept kids in grade, but the consequence was that now every parent with a mildly bright kid wanted their kid in that program. But for truly gifted kids, there are special programs to meet their needs. |
Anonymous
|
The current allocation of AAP centers should be evaluated for the comprehensive study. Every pyramid should have a minimum of one ES elementary and one MS feeder and students should only be assigned to those centers if they live in bounds for that pyramid, even if that means offering AAP services at every middle school. Students should not have to travel out of pyramid for AAP services. These out of bound cohorts can be traced through the transfer dashboard even at the high school level.
Onto the other point. There are not enough middle school seats to transition from 7-8 to 6-8. They have three options for pursuing that pipe dream. (1) Wait for enrollment levels to decline to the point where there are enough middle school seats to support 3 grades. (2) Invest on expanding middle schools so there are enough seats to support 3 grades. (3) Shove sixth grade into modular classrooms for the next 10-20 years. Personally, I’d go with option 1, but they’ll obviously do option 3. |
Anonymous
It makes sense from Reid's perspective. If the goal is to control how and what children are taught earlier and earlier, you will want universal pre-k. Right now, people are using Waldorf, Montessori or church-based options, hiring nannies or taking their children to private daycare. Not to mention, too many moms are SAHM spending more time taking kids to the playground/library and doing little puzzles when they could be drawing a taxed salary. |
Anonymous
No, the centers are the Trojan horse. If they could successfully get rid of those, they'd come for AAP next. The AAP board is flooded with posts about how AAP isn't fair, how their children are made fun of because they didn't get in, how it breaks up community schools and causes resentment and depression among those rejected, etc. it's an obsession for them. It's a really weird fixation. |
Anonymous
Maybe it’s based on actual experiences but, either way, they really need to figure out what their plans are for centers that pull kids from other schools before they do county-wide boundary adjustments. Calling something a “Trojan Horse” comes across as a weak excuse to maintain an illogical status quo. |
Anonymous
Aren’t a many families planning to move to private if certain boundary changes happen? That could help pay for pre-k. |
Anonymous
It's only illogical to you. It makes sense for those of us who have children who need that structure. |
Anonymous
Well, they SAID that getting rid of trailers and modulars is part of the rezoning goals and increases school safety … I agree, I don’t see how they get 6th into all the middle schools at this point. The best they could do it move some ES 6th grade into the MS if the MS has enough extra classrooms, but then you’d definitely have some ES in your pyramid that were K-6, and others that were K-5. Hot mess. The boundary discussions pre-dated Reid and were thrown off track because of Covid. Now it seems like she wants to throw a wrench into the boundary discussion by also bringing up the topic of 6th to MS and trying to fold it in to the boundaries. In my line of work we call that “scope creep!” |
Anonymous
I can't speak to what others intentions are. But I have multiple children and I want all of them to attend the same school. Of my school age kids one is level IV the other will not be. I agree the standards to be deemed level IV are not high and is often a frustration for my Kid. I do think if the handful of kids stayed local instead of going to the center that may be marginally better but really not much. Considering the low bar of entrance I do believe if local is offered they should not be bussed to a center. If they ever change it to an actual advanced program then have at it with centers. |
Anonymous
My niece goes to an elementary that does an in school class and uses an actual IQ test for admission with a set cut off. It starts in 3rd grade like fcps. The area is educated middle to upper middle class. Their elementary class sizes are small, around 20 kids with 5 classes per grade. The one gifted class per grade that uses a hard IQ cut off as its only admissions criteria is TINY, around 15 kids. Using the hard IQ cut off, in her grade, only 2 girls qualified. The rest are boys. Looking through her yearbook at the other grades, those small "truly gifted" IQ based classes were all boy heavy, although more like 60/40 or 70/30, not 2 girls and a dozen plus boys like my niece's grade. But all were majority male. The races were more evenly represented than the genders, and appeared to more or less reflect the school make up. There was not one class that was girl heavy or close to 50/50. Again, the only criteria for admission is an individually administered IQ test paid for by the district. The kids casually refer to that class as "the smart kids" and themselves as the "regular" or "not smart" kids. It is not from the teachers or parents based on what my niece says in her elementary school unfiltered candor. Her parents try to correct her, and she responds with "Mom, we are not stupid. We all know they are the smart kids." Funnily, the kids, including the 2 girls who qualified for that class, also refer to the gifted class as the class that doesn't know how to behave. I would be careful what you wish for. Eliminating AAP might not be all you think it will be. |
Anonymous
I don't think parents would care if gen ed had 20 kid classes. If they went to an IQ test and we still had large classes, parents here would sue over the gender distribution. |
Anonymous
Where did I say eliminate AAP? All I said was in it's current form centers are not needed and a waste of resources. The kids can have their cohort getting slightly advanced curriculum. My child can be bored with the math curriculum just as well staying at their base school and not being bussed to a center. |
Anonymous
|
Where’s is the transparency? Which schools still lack local? I’m sure there are only a few left.
I’m guessing when local is at all, no more centers. I see removal from middle coming with boundary changes. |