FCPS Proposal to close down AAP Centers at Greenbriar West ES and Carson MS

[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:I think it's the beginning of the end of centers. There are several board members who don't like them. I could see them saying LLIV is the same and costs less.

It the same thing and does cost less. It's a sensible solution that's been a long time coming.

In some schools where there is critical mass, it is similar. In other schools where is not critical mass, it is not.

It used to be that this was true. Nowadays the AAP program has been expanded so much that the only difference between kids in that 85-95th %ile range who are in the program and those who aren't is that the former prepped better, appealed more and got expensive outside testing done. If you want to expand the program that much, fine, but you could just pull in those same kids from inside the school itself without resorting to expensive bussing and without overcrowding the center schools.

Size of base school plays a role--our school is very small and often has only 2 classes per grade: LLIV would turn into a "smart class" and a "dumb class" in each grade, not a good thing, IMO.

Well this is exactly how center schools play out. My DC goes to one of the larger centers and while there are far more AAP classes (in fact, they outnumber the Gen Ed classes), there is the underlying - and false - assumption that the AAP classes are "smart" and Gen Ed "dumb". In fact, center schools only magnify this insanity and further the false division of students. It would be far less egregious if there was only one AAP class per grade, and the rest were all Gen Ed. Kind of like real life.

In my son's case, he has two base school classmates that went with him to the Center. One Center-eligible classmate chose to stay at the base school. So he no longer goes to the Center school and has a Local Level IV class of four students?

If there were four kids eligible for LLIV, then it would even easier for them to be integrated into a Gen Ed class and given differentiated work by the teacher. These kids will not wither up and become comatose if they are in a mixed-level class.

My DC was bullied in a 2nd grade class, including repeatedly thrown down into the dirt on the playground. So no, he did not wither up and become comatose, but I was not a fan of the school environment for him.

What does that have to do with differentiated learning? AAP/Gen Ed?

I think that if my son were with more academic peers -- as in he had more than one other kid that was at his academic level in his base school -- he might have been less isolated and subject to bullying. He came home in tears so many times due to how poorly he was treated at recess. In our case, he was thrilled to leave his base school to go to the Center as he escaped the tormenting.

I'm sorry this happened to you, but you need to realize that kids get bullied for a wide variety of reasons: because they're short, because they're tall, because they're bright and because they're not too bright, because they have disabilities...
The answer is to work to stop the bullying, not to say that these kids need to be protected by sending them to a different facility. I realize advanced students need to be able to work at their own level (my kids are in AAP) but bullying is not a good reason--and FWIW, one of my kids has been bullied because he's 2E, by kids both in AAP and in GenEd.

Thank you, and yes, I do know and realize that kids get bullied for a wide variety of reasons. In my son's case, it doesn't help his cause by being the socially awkward, geeky kid that also is advanced academically, who is diagnosed ADHD with anxiety and has a 504 plan. The counselor at his base school wondered why things got "so bad" when my son wanted to walk home from recess after the first instance of bullying.

Now in third grade the counselor at his Center school has been an incredible resource to us (both my son and us as parents). She really gets him, and works with the teacher, the principal, the school psychologist and others on staff. The difference from one school to another is just incredible. I am thankful that it has improved so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's the beginning of the end of centers. There are several board members who don't like them. I could see them saying LLIV is the same and costs less.

It the same thing and does cost less. It's a sensible solution that's been a long time coming.

In some schools where there is critical mass, it is similar. In other schools where is not critical mass, it is not.

It used to be that this was true. Nowadays the AAP program has been expanded so much that the only difference between kids in that 85-95th %ile range who are in the program and those who aren't is that the former prepped better, appealed more and got expensive outside testing done. If you want to expand the program that much, fine, but you could just pull in those same kids from inside the school itself without resorting to expensive bussing and without overcrowding the center schools.

Size of base school plays a role--our school is very small and often has only 2 classes per grade: LLIV would turn into a "smart class" and a "dumb class" in each grade, not a good thing, IMO.

Well this is exactly how center schools play out. My DC goes to one of the larger centers and while there are far more AAP classes (in fact, they outnumber the Gen Ed classes), there is the underlying - and false - assumption that the AAP classes are "smart" and Gen Ed "dumb". In fact, center schools only magnify this insanity and further the false division of students. It would be far less egregious if there was only one AAP class per grade, and the rest were all Gen Ed. Kind of like real life.

In my son's case, he has two base school classmates that went with him to the Center. One Center-eligible classmate chose to stay at the base school. So he no longer goes to the Center school and has a Local Level IV class of four students?

If there were four kids eligible for LLIV, then it would even easier for them to be integrated into a Gen Ed class and given differentiated work by the teacher. These kids will not wither up and become comatose if they are in a mixed-level class.

My DC was bullied in a 2nd grade class, including repeatedly thrown down into the dirt on the playground. So no, he did not wither up and become comatose, but I was not a fan of the school environment for him.

What does that have to do with differentiated learning? AAP/Gen Ed?

I think that if my son were with more academic peers -- as in he had more than one other kid that was at his academic level in his base school -- he might have been less isolated and subject to bullying. He came home in tears so many times due to how poorly he was treated at recess. In our case, he was thrilled to leave his base school to go to the Center as he escaped the tormenting.

My DS had plenty of "academic peers"in his school and they still bullied and isolated him. It is about social intelligence not academic intelligence. He had to be taught social skills. Bullies will find the weak spot and exploit it. If your child was in a room filled with his "academic peers" there would still be a child at the bottom of the social ladder being isolated and bullied.

[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:I think it's the beginning of the end of centers. There are several board members who don't like them. I could see them saying LLIV is the same and costs less.

It the same thing and does cost less. It's a sensible solution that's been a long time coming.

In some schools where there is critical mass, it is similar. In other schools where is not critical mass, it is not.

It used to be that this was true. Nowadays the AAP program has been expanded so much that the only difference between kids in that 85-95th %ile range who are in the program and those who aren't is that the former prepped better, appealed more and got expensive outside testing done. If you want to expand the program that much, fine, but you could just pull in those same kids from inside the school itself without resorting to expensive bussing and without overcrowding the center schools.

Size of base school plays a role--our school is very small and often has only 2 classes per grade: LLIV would turn into a "smart class" and a "dumb class" in each grade, not a good thing, IMO.

Well this is exactly how center schools play out. My DC goes to one of the larger centers and while there are far more AAP classes (in fact, they outnumber the Gen Ed classes), there is the underlying - and false - assumption that the AAP classes are "smart" and Gen Ed "dumb". In fact, center schools only magnify this insanity and further the false division of students. It would be far less egregious if there was only one AAP class per grade, and the rest were all Gen Ed. Kind of like real life.

In my son's case, he has two base school classmates that went with him to the Center. One Center-eligible classmate chose to stay at the base school. So he no longer goes to the Center school and has a Local Level IV class of four students?

If there were four kids eligible for LLIV, then it would even easier for them to be integrated into a Gen Ed class and given differentiated work by the teacher. These kids will not wither up and become comatose if they are in a mixed-level class.

My DC was bullied in a 2nd grade class, including repeatedly thrown down into the dirt on the playground. So no, he did not wither up and become comatose, but I was not a fan of the school environment for him.

What does that have to do with differentiated learning? AAP/Gen Ed?

I think that if my son were with more academic peers -- as in he had more than one other kid that was at his academic level in his base school -- he might have been less isolated and subject to bullying. He came home in tears so many times due to how poorly he was treated at recess. In our case, he was thrilled to leave his base school to go to the Center as he escaped the tormenting.

My DS had plenty of "academic peers"in his school and they still bullied and isolated him. It is about social intelligence not academic intelligence. He had to be taught social skills. Bullies will find the weak spot and exploit it. If your child was in a room filled with his "academic peers" there would still be a child at the bottom of the social ladder being isolated and bullied.

I don't know why you find it so difficult to acknowledge that AAP kids in a center are less likely to bully the type of student described above than GenEd kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

My DS had plenty of "academic peers"in his school and they still bullied and isolated him. It is about social intelligence not academic intelligence. He had to be taught social skills. Bullies will find the weak spot and exploit it. If your child was in a room filled with his "academic peers" there would still be a child at the bottom of the social ladder being isolated and bullied.

I don't know why you find it so difficult to acknowledge that AAP kids in a center are less likely to bully the type of student described above than GenEd kids.

Not PP, but at the stereotyping. Hopefully you're not passing that on to your child. Bullying is bullying, and does not discriminate by IQ or SES or whatever other class divider you want to use. Both GenEd and AAP kids can/do bully other kids within and without of their peer group.

Centers will still exist. If they are overcrowded, the feeder schools' capacity and Level IV critical mass will be assessed. If the feeder school has Level IV critical mass and is under capacity, they will cease to be a feeder school and instead just have their in-house Level IV program. If the feeder school has its own capacity issues, or has insufficient Level IV participation, the kids stay at the center.

It is a capacity solution that is long overdue.

[Anonymous]

What does that have to do with differentiated learning? AAP/Gen Ed?

I think that if my son were with more academic peers -- as in he had more than one other kid that was at his academic level in his base school -- he might have been less isolated and subject to bullying. He came home in tears so many times due to how poorly he was treated at recess. In our case, he was thrilled to leave his base school to go to the Center as he escaped the tormenting.

My DS had plenty of "academic peers"in his school and they still bullied and isolated him. It is about social intelligence not academic intelligence. He had to be taught social skills. Bullies will find the weak spot and exploit it. If your child was in a room filled with his "academic peers" there would still be a child at the bottom of the social ladder being isolated and bullied.

I don't know why you find it so difficult to acknowledge that AAP kids in a center are less likely to bully the type of student described above than GenEd kids.

NP. This is not true at all. It seems to me that the guidance counselor had more of a role helping PP's kid than the other AAP students. AAP students can be relentless bullies and often get away wtih it more because of larger class sizes and more group work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. This is not true at all. It seems to me that the guidance counselor had more of a role helping PP's kid than the other AAP students. AAP students can be relentless bullies and often get away wtih it more because of larger class sizes and more group work.

Yes, AAP students can be relentless bullies. General Ed students can also be relentless bullies. What works well for one student may not work well for another student in the same class at the same school.

[Anonymous]

Bullies are more likely to be GenEd kids from single-parent and broken homes than AAP kids. Everyone knows this, and it's one reason why parents try to get bright kids into AAP even if they aren't geniuses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bullies are more likely to be GenEd kids from single-parent and broken homes than AAP kids. Everyone knows this, and it's one reason why parents try to get bright kids into AAP even if they aren't geniuses.

Wow. I hope I'm being dense this morning and missed your sarcasm ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bullies are more likely to be GenEd kids from single-parent and broken homes than AAP kids. Everyone knows this, and it's one reason why parents try to get bright kids into AAP even if they aren't geniuses.

Wow. I hope I'm being dense this morning and missed your sarcasm ...

Same here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bullies are more likely to be GenEd kids from single-parent and broken homes than AAP kids. Everyone knows this, and it's one reason why parents try to get bright kids into AAP even if they aren't geniuses.

Bahahahahaa. You're just hilarious, troll.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's the beginning of the end of centers. There are several board members who don't like them. I could see them saying LLIV is the same and costs less.

It the same thing and does cost less. It's a sensible solution that's been a long time coming.

In some schools where there is critical mass, it is similar. In other schools where is not critical mass, it is not.

It used to be that this was true. Nowadays the AAP program has been expanded so much that the only difference between kids in that 85-95th %ile range who are in the program and those who aren't is that the former prepped better, appealed more and got expensive outside testing done. If you want to expand the program that much, fine, but you could just pull in those same kids from inside the school itself without resorting to expensive bussing and without overcrowding the center schools.

Size of base school plays a role--our school is very small and often has only 2 classes per grade: LLIV would turn into a "smart class" and a "dumb class" in each grade, not a good thing, IMO.

Well this is exactly how center schools play out. My DC goes to one of the larger centers and while there are far more AAP classes (in fact, they outnumber the Gen Ed classes), there is the underlying - and false - assumption that the AAP classes are "smart" and Gen Ed "dumb". In fact, center schools only magnify this insanity and further the false division of students. It would be far less egregious if there was only one AAP class per grade, and the rest were all Gen Ed. Kind of like real life.

In my son's case, he has two base school classmates that went with him to the Center. One Center-eligible classmate chose to stay at the base school. So he no longer goes to the Center school and has a Local Level IV class of four students?

If there were four kids eligible for LLIV, then it would even easier for them to be integrated into a Gen Ed class and given differentiated work by the teacher. These kids will not wither up and become comatose if they are in a mixed-level class.

My DC was bullied in a 2nd grade class, including repeatedly thrown down into the dirt on the playground. So no, he did not wither up and become comatose, but I was not a fan of the school environment for him.

What does that have to do with differentiated learning? AAP/Gen Ed?

I think that if my son were with more academic peers -- as in he had more than one other kid that was at his academic level in his base school -- he might have been less isolated and subject to bullying. He came home in tears so many times due to how poorly he was treated at recess. In our case, he was thrilled to leave his base school to go to the Center as he escaped the tormenting.

My DS had plenty of "academic peers"in his school and they still bullied and isolated him. It is about social intelligence not academic intelligence. He had to be taught social skills. Bullies will find the weak spot and exploit it. If your child was in a room filled with his "academic peers" there would still be a child at the bottom of the social ladder being isolated and bullied.

I don't know why you find it so difficult to acknowledge that AAP kids in a center are less likely to bully the type of student described above than GenEd kids.

Wow. The above statement is just unbelievable. My DD (Gen Ed) went to a sleepover this weekend and came home in tears the next day. The other girls (AAP) had relentlessly badgered her and one other girl because they are not. The AAP girls said numerous ugly things to them and tried to exclude them, because they aren't in AAP. DD no longer wants to attend her center school, and I don't blame her a bit. If I can get her out of there, I will. I had a long conversation with the mom yesterday, who had been unaware that this was going on. This certainly isn't the only example of AAP kids bullying a GE child. These kids have been told (falsely) for so long that they are somehow "better" than the GE students, that they actually believe it; this needs to stop. Eliminating centers would be a very good place to start.

[Anonymous]

Back on topic - please?

So I have one son at LLIV and a daughter starting LLIV next fall. We looked at both the center and local and decided the local was a happier choice...kids were going to school with other kids in the neighborhood, the local school was closer, and so on. We couldn't really see any academic advantage to going to the center where there were few, if any neighborhood ties. Plus the center is a HUGE school and I was worried the kids would get lost.

So at face value I'm inclined to agree with the idea that center schools aren't delivering value relative to the effort required to maintain them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back on topic - please?

So I have one son at LLIV and a daughter starting LLIV next fall. We looked at both the center and local and decided the local was a happier choice...kids were going to school with other kids in the neighborhood, the local school was closer, and so on. We couldn't really see any academic advantage to going to the center where there were few, if any neighborhood ties. Plus the center is a HUGE school and I was worried the kids would get lost.

So at face value I'm inclined to agree with the idea that center schools aren't delivering value relative to the effort required to maintain them.

One anecdote does not equate to Best Practice for the Entire County.

Do what is best for your child(ren) in the circumstances and with the choices that are available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back on topic - please?

So I have one son at LLIV and a daughter starting LLIV next fall. We looked at both the center and local and decided the local was a happier choice...kids were going to school with other kids in the neighborhood, the local school was closer, and so on. We couldn't really see any academic advantage to going to the center where there were few, if any neighborhood ties. Plus the center is a HUGE school and I was worried the kids would get lost.

So at face value I'm inclined to agree with the idea that center schools aren't delivering value relative to the effort required to maintain them.

One anecdote does not equate to Best Practice for the Entire County.

Do what is best for your child(ren) in the circumstances and with the choices that are available.

I will, thanks.

But what an intriguing reply. If I'm not supposed to include personal experience in my, not to be pedantic, but two "anecdotes," then what am I supposed to include?

Simply saying that if there's some compelling benefit to keeping a center school, I sure haven't seen it.

[Anonymous]

I have one kid at an elementary school center and two at the feeder neighborhood school.

For the two at the base school, at this point in their lives, the feeder is the best option for them.

For the one child at the center, the center is absolutely by far the best possible school situation for that child and many others.

Question for those of you talking about your non AAP kids getting bullied by AAP kids. May I ask, are you talking about girls?

I have boys, and am around boys. I do not see bullying by the kids I am around (boys) from AAP kids to center kids. I have seen normal peer to peer bullying that you will see in any AAP classroom (my kid experienced months of this). I have seen the typical cool kid bullying the week kid. I have seen one instance of the odd geeky kid in AAP get bullied not only from a few classmates., but also pushed around and bullied by non AAP kids who don't have classes with him but would target him in the halls, recess, etc. This is a kid who likely would have been bullied in many different circumstances ufortunately. Thankfully the staff put an end to it as soon as they were made aware.

I have seen some typical elementary bullying by both AAP and non AAP kids at my kids school, but definitely tuink the bullying is far less in AAP for the geeky boys because they have peers and friends there.

I have not witnessed the kind of bullying by AAP kids to non AAP kids that is talked about in this thread.

BUT I have heard it mentioned, and always by the parents of girls. Not once have I heard or seen the boys of AAP bullying or picking fights with boys who are mot AAP.

Is this more of a mean girl issue, compounded by AAP? I really wonder if these kids are the type that would be bullying and excluding others, whether it be AAP, or soccer or dance or regular school.

Is anyone else witnessing AAP boys bullying non AAP boys? Because I am not seeing it, and I have both AAP and non AAP sons with a mix of friends from both programs.