Dear AAP Parents

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no disability law that states being advanced is a disability. Therefore aap is not a law or mandate. I am starting to think the aap parents are dumb as a box of rock turds.

-aap identified child's parent who thinks centers are stupid

Gifted education is a mandated program.

Yes and it can be given as pull-outs from the child's base school. There is no mandate for AAP and centers.

There are economies of scale by grouping kids together.

Do have any evidence that FCPS has saved money through this economy of scale by grouping kids together? Are you saying it would be MORE expensive to leave them at their base schools and have the AART do pull-outs with them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no disability law that states being advanced is a disability. Therefore aap is not a law or mandate. I am starting to think the aap parents are dumb as a box of rock turds.

-aap identified child's parent who thinks centers are stupid

Gifted education is a mandated program.

Yes and it can be given as pull-outs from the child's base school. There is no mandate for AAP and centers.

There are economies of scale by grouping kids together.

Do have any evidence that FCPS has saved money through this economy of scale by grouping kids together? Are you saying it would be MORE expensive to leave them at their base schools and have the AART do pull-outs with them?

It would be more expensive because the AART would be taking children out of class verses now where they stay all day with a classroom teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no disability law that states being advanced is a disability. Therefore aap is not a law or mandate. I am starting to think the aap parents are dumb as a box of rock turds.

-aap identified child's parent who thinks centers are stupid

Gifted education is a mandated program.

Yes and it can be given as pull-outs from the child's base school. There is no mandate for AAP and centers.

There are economies of scale by grouping kids together.

Do have any evidence that FCPS has saved money through this economy of scale by grouping kids together? Are you saying it would be MORE expensive to leave them at their base schools and have the AART do pull-outs with them?

It would be more expensive because the AART would be taking children out of class verses now where they stay all day with a classroom teacher.

Explain how this is more expensive.

The AART has a salary, she doesn't get paid on a per kid out of class basis. She is already taking kids out for Level II and Level III services. Are you saying Level II and Level III cost more than the AAP Program?

Kids get pulled out all the time, whether it's for enrichment or remediation.

Your economy of scale justification is a fail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no disability law that states being advanced is a disability. Therefore aap is not a law or mandate. I am starting to think the aap parents are dumb as a box of rock turds.

-aap identified child's parent who thinks centers are stupid

Gifted education is a mandated program.

Yes and it can be given as pull-outs from the child's base school. There is no mandate for AAP and centers.

There are economies of scale by grouping kids together.

Do have any evidence that FCPS has saved money through this economy of scale by grouping kids together? Are you saying it would be MORE expensive to leave them at their base schools and have the AART do pull-outs with them?

It would be more expensive because the AART would be taking children out of class verses now where they stay all day with a classroom teacher.

Explain how this is more expensive.

The AART has a salary, she doesn't get paid on a per kid out of class basis. She is already taking kids out for Level II and Level III services. Are you saying Level II and Level III cost more than the AAP Program?

Kids get pulled out all the time, whether it's for enrichment or remediation.

Your economy of scale justification is a fail.

You would need a lot more AARTs. Right now they have full time jobs without doing all these extra pull outs. I think you should ask a teacher if it's easier to teach a class of 30 students with similar abilities or 30 kids with very different abilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no disability law that states being advanced is a disability. Therefore aap is not a law or mandate. I am starting to think the aap parents are dumb as a box of rock turds.

-aap identified child's parent who thinks centers are stupid

Gifted education is a mandated program.

Yes and it can be given as pull-outs from the child's base school. There is no mandate for AAP and centers.

There are economies of scale by grouping kids together.

Do have any evidence that FCPS has saved money through this economy of scale by grouping kids together? Are you saying it would be MORE expensive to leave them at their base schools and have the AART do pull-outs with them?

It would be more expensive because the AART would be taking children out of class verses now where they stay all day with a classroom teacher.

Explain how this is more expensive.

The AART has a salary, she doesn't get paid on a per kid out of class basis. She is already taking kids out for Level II and Level III services. Are you saying Level II and Level III cost more than the AAP Program?

Kids get pulled out all the time, whether it's for enrichment or remediation.

Your economy of scale justification is a fail.

You would need a lot more AARTs. Right now they have full time jobs without doing all these extra pull outs. I think you should ask a teacher if it's easier to teach a class of 30 students with similar abilities or 30 kids with very different abilities.

+1

The difference in cost is transportation. It would be interesting to see what the cost difference is between bussing students to centers compared to the transportation cost if these same kids went to their base school. (Some of the kids would still be bussed to the base school and others would be walkers.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no disability law that states being advanced is a disability. Therefore aap is not a law or mandate. I am starting to think the aap parents are dumb as a box of rock turds.

-aap identified child's parent who thinks centers are stupid

Gifted education is a mandated program.

Yes and it can be given as pull-outs from the child's base school. There is no mandate for AAP and centers.

There are economies of scale by grouping kids together.

Do have any evidence that FCPS has saved money through this economy of scale by grouping kids together? Are you saying it would be MORE expensive to leave them at their base schools and have the AART do pull-outs with them?

It would be more expensive because the AART would be taking children out of class verses now where they stay all day with a classroom teacher.

Explain how this is more expensive.

The AART has a salary, she doesn't get paid on a per kid out of class basis. She is already taking kids out for Level II and Level III services. Are you saying Level II and Level III cost more than the AAP Program?

Kids get pulled out all the time, whether it's for enrichment or remediation.

Your economy of scale justification is a fail.

You also need to keep in mind that some of the kids in AAP (probably majority) could benefit from enrichment, but a small percentage need more than just enrichment. They actually learn differently and greatly benefit from a different styles of teaching, so I'm not sure an AART teacher could provide this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no disability law that states being advanced is a disability. Therefore aap is not a law or mandate. I am starting to think the aap parents are dumb as a box of rock turds.

-aap identified child's parent who thinks centers are stupid

Gifted education is a mandated program.

Yes and it can be given as pull-outs from the child's base school. There is no mandate for AAP and centers.

There are economies of scale by grouping kids together.

Do have any evidence that FCPS has saved money through this economy of scale by grouping kids together? Are you saying it would be MORE expensive to leave them at their base schools and have the AART do pull-outs with them?

It would be more expensive because the AART would be taking children out of class verses now where they stay all day with a classroom teacher.

Explain how this is more expensive.

The AART has a salary, she doesn't get paid on a per kid out of class basis. She is already taking kids out for Level II and Level III services. Are you saying Level II and Level III cost more than the AAP Program?

Kids get pulled out all the time, whether it's for enrichment or remediation.

Your economy of scale justification is a fail.

You would need a lot more AARTs. Right now they have full time jobs without doing all these extra pull outs. I think you should ask a teacher if it's easier to teach a class of 30 students with similar abilities or 30 kids with very different abilities.

+1

The difference in cost is transportation. It would be interesting to see what the cost difference is between bussing students to centers compared to the transportation cost if these same kids went to their base school. (Some of the kids would still be bussed to the base school and others would be walkers.)

The transportation cost would definitely be less. My kids are walkers to their base school but going to the center our kids would get bus service.

Also, why make it extra work for the AART. Just pull out all the kids with enrichment needs at the same time.

Even better, implement the Level IV curriculum across the board and just pull out the very few (and likely this wouldn't even be needed in every school) that are extremely gifted. The ones that absolutely cannot learn anything at all in the implemented Level IV across the board gen ed. classes.

Problem solved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no disability law that states being advanced is a disability. Therefore aap is not a law or mandate. I am starting to think the aap parents are dumb as a box of rock turds.

-aap identified child's parent who thinks centers are stupid

I guess Virginia law does not count in Virginia.

Not the PP, but you're honestly saying, with a straight face, that having an academically "advanced" child - and here we're not talking about off-the-charts gifted and unable to learn in a regular classroom - means they have a disability???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are private travel teams anything like a publicly funded school system?

Exactly. Thank you.

Already explained.

Explained poorly, because it was pointed out that travel teams are not publicly funded. If they were, you can bet there would be an outcry, but since travel sports are privately funded, they are perfectly within their rights to pick and choose who plays on their teams. Not like a publicly funded school system in the least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are private travel teams anything like a publicly funded school system?

Exactly. Thank you.

Already explained.

Explained poorly, because it was pointed out that travel teams are not publicly funded. If they were, you can bet there would be an outcry, but since travel sports are privately funded, they are perfectly within their rights to pick and choose who plays on their teams. Not like a publicly funded school system in the least.

TJ is publicly funded, to, as is UVA, Virginia Tech, William and Mary, etc. None of those have open admissions...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Fairness doesn't mean giving every child the same thing, it means giving them what they need." Rick Lavoie

I don't really think it's "fair" for my kid to sit in class twiddling her thumbs because she's figured out how to solve for the unknown in algebra while the rest of the class is still working on adding 3 digit numbers.

Honestly, I can't figure out why the non-AAP parents are so jealous. From my experience with my DC, AAP has meant math a year ahead and getting additional work on the other subjects with a little CML thrown in. Although I think non- AAP students are also given the opportunity to do CML. I regret sticking with LLIV, because my kid is still bored and twiddling her thumbs in class.

I'm totally mystified why other parents think it's unreasonable for me to expect the schools to meet my child's educational needs and provide instruction that challenges her and allows her to learn.

And, seriously, kids who learn quickly and easily should suffer through being bored and ignored in class unless their parents can afford $30,000+ in tuition for private school?

And I'm totally mystified as to why parents think it's unreasonable to open AAP up to any student capable of doing the work. This has nothing to do with jealousy, and everything to do with a public school system spending more money, time, and attention on some kids than on others. It's an issue of inequity.

There is no reason to do away with advanced academics; they should simply be open and available to anyone interested and able. This goes for language arts, science, and social studies, as thankfully qualified Gen Ed kids are already included in AAP math. It's really not a stretch to then open up the other subjects as well. Not all AAP kids are actually advanced in all subjects either, by the way. Making AAP accessible to all would allow everyone to cycle into and out of the appropriate class, as needed. This is not a difficult concept.

PP here with highly gifted DD and not highly gifted DS. I would oppose this and vote for eliminating AAP and only having special accommodations for those in the top few percent. My DD would get lost in this type of instruction just as she did in gen ed. I do think they could make the gen ed curriculum more challenging, but I would prefer to have the top 3% receive the special ed they need and the rest of the curriculum increased for gen ed where needed.

How would you feel about that?

I'm the PP and I think that's a great idea - as long as they only offered the exceptionally gifted kids services, not the masses who currently populate AAP. And I absolutely agree that Gen Ed needs to be more challenging as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone here is saying "just put the AAP kids in the GenEd rooms and provide enrichment for everyone..." Except you don't seem to understand there is no time in the school day for that. The GenEd classes have to spend all their minutes slogging away at the basics so they can pass the standardized tests. Those classrooms have very little, if any, time for other enrichment programs. Right?

Uh, no. Wrong. You're forgetting that the vast majority of Gen Ed students are just as bright as the vast majority of AAP students. It's been pointed out again and again that it's only the very bottom and the VERY top of the spectrum where you find kids who actually have learning differences. My son's Gen Ed class moves along at a nice clip and they have plenty of time for enrichment. Believe it or not, they're not "slogging away at the basics so they can pass the standardized tests".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no disability law that states being advanced is a disability. Therefore aap is not a law or mandate. I am starting to think the aap parents are dumb as a box of rock turds.

-aap identified child's parent who thinks centers are stupid

Gifted education is a mandated program.

Yes. Perhaps gifted education is mandated. But we all know that AAP is not gifted anymore. That's the joke of it all. It's simply a new version of tracking.

Nailed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no disability law that states being advanced is a disability. Therefore aap is not a law or mandate. I am starting to think the aap parents are dumb as a box of rock turds.

-aap identified child's parent who thinks centers are stupid

Gifted education is a mandated program.

Yes. Perhaps gifted education is mandated. But we all know that AAP is not gifted anymore. That's the joke of it all. It's simply a new version of tracking.

The name was changed so the child was not labeled; the service was named instead.

Oh, come on now. You parrot this all the time and everyone knows the truth - very, very few AAP kids are actually highly gifted and in "need" of a special curriculum. It's laughable to claim that all those kids are "gifted". I agree with the PP who said gifted enrichment could be provided through pull-outs. VA is not mandated to have special centers for full-time enrichment of mainstream kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no disability law that states being advanced is a disability. Therefore aap is not a law or mandate. I am starting to think the aap parents are dumb as a box of rock turds.

-aap identified child's parent who thinks centers are stupid

Gifted education is a mandated program.

Yes. Perhaps gifted education is mandated. But we all know that AAP is not gifted anymore. That's the joke of it all. It's simply a new version of tracking.

Nailed it.

You can have gifted programs you don't need to make a center.

Furthermore, just like SOLs, the threshold should be raised every year.