Does AAP create unhelpful elitism and separation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Falls Church City is a very elitist neighborhood separate from any poors, so I find this whole discussion a little silly. Falls Church City has the smallest differential between students in probably the entire DMV area. And because they are wealthy they can do a lot for each child. Fairfax has kids with many needs that Falls Church City just doesn't have. Seems silly to be complaining about AAP when Falls Church City does nothing to help bring in more lower income housing etc. which would really help diversify the city.

OP here. I agree. That is why we are moving. We want to move into a more diverse neighborhood. There is no other reason we are moving. My kids are getting a great academic education in FCC, but not a real world education by not seeing economic and racial diversity. Because of our concern about integration, I was alarmed by the idea of separation of the "smart kids" and generally have an allergic reaction to putting kids in boxes.

How many threads have you started about your dire predicament? Aren't you the same poster who asked about Marshall vs. W-L vs. George Mason for IB?

I mean, perhaps you're actually concerned, but it sounds more like you're just bored and want people to engage with you.

Ha ha ha! I'm in my 50s. I remember a co-worker from a couple decades ago whose divorced mom moved to a "diverse, integrated, etc" area because she wanted her kids to be exposed to the "real-world economic and racial diversity". My co-worker and his brother ended up in a predominantly black school and he said that both got beaten up at least once a week. As an adult, he hated black people because of that. Be careful what you wish for..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Falls Church City is a very elitist neighborhood separate from any poors, so I find this whole discussion a little silly. Falls Church City has the smallest differential between students in probably the entire DMV area. And because they are wealthy they can do a lot for each child. Fairfax has kids with many needs that Falls Church City just doesn't have. Seems silly to be complaining about AAP when Falls Church City does nothing to help bring in more lower income housing etc. which would really help diversify the city.

OP here. I agree. That is why we are moving. We want to move into a more diverse neighborhood. There is no other reason we are moving. My kids are getting a great academic education in FCC, but not a real world education by not seeing economic and racial diversity. Because of our concern about integration, I was alarmed by the idea of separation of the "smart kids" and generally have an allergic reaction to putting kids in boxes.

How many threads have you started about your dire predicament? Aren't you the same poster who asked about Marshall vs. W-L vs. George Mason for IB?

I mean, perhaps you're actually concerned, but it sounds more like you're just bored and want people to engage with you.

Op here. Yes! That was me. I'm definitely not bored, but quite possibly overthinking the decision about where we move/what schools we go to. Feels like an important decision. It is a good thing that there are so many great options in this area, but pretty overwhelming too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Falls Church City is a very elitist neighborhood separate from any poors, so I find this whole discussion a little silly. Falls Church City has the smallest differential between students in probably the entire DMV area. And because they are wealthy they can do a lot for each child. Fairfax has kids with many needs that Falls Church City just doesn't have. Seems silly to be complaining about AAP when Falls Church City does nothing to help bring in more lower income housing etc. which would really help diversify the city.

OP here. I agree. That is why we are moving. We want to move into a more diverse neighborhood. There is no other reason we are moving. My kids are getting a great academic education in FCC, but not a real world education by not seeing economic and racial diversity. Because of our concern about integration, I was alarmed by the idea of separation of the "smart kids" and generally have an allergic reaction to putting kids in boxes.

How many threads have you started about your dire predicament? Aren't you the same poster who asked about Marshall vs. W-L vs. George Mason for IB?

I mean, perhaps you're actually concerned, but it sounds more like you're just bored and want people to engage with you.

Why would you criticize someone for asking questions on something they are wanting advice on and (therefore) asking for "engagement" about? That's exactly what these discussion boards are for. Sounds like you are the one that is "bored" enough to post only to criticize someone for merely asking advice from others. Why bother posting unless you can contribute to the dialogue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school is having a field trip just for the AAP kids.

If you're talking about Keene Mill, that trip is organized and pair for by the parents of the AAP kids, and not every AAP kid even goes on the trip. It is not run or paid for by the school.

You're proving the point of the OP, though. The fact that parents and kids there desire an "AAP only" field trip shows that they're being elitist and promoting separation.

Without knowing all the facts you have jump to conclusion! Keene Mill AAP class has students from seven (7) feeder schools. If few parents AAP decides to have field trip why do they need to invite other classes? Most likely parents from these feeder schools knows only AAP parents through parties etc. Maybe they wanted to keep group small, Maybe non-aap had their own field trip or didn't want to participate? Don't all field trips like these goes through PTA?

Do you get offended when scout troops has their own field trips and all non-scout students are not invited? Stop over analyzing!!

\

Just stop. You're not helping your case at all, but instead you're reinforcing the idea that AAP kids need to be isolated from gen ed kids. I would be horrified if my kids were invited to an AAP only field trip, just as I would be horrified if they were so isolated from the gen ed kids that they didn't count any of them among their friends. If it's a party among friends, stick with that. If it's a party only for Ms. Larla's class, that's fine. Turning the whole thing into an AAP parents and kids only want to associate with other AAP parents and kids smacks of exactly the type of elitism from the OP.

Also, your analogy to scout field trips is poor, as scouts are a self-selected group with reasonably equal access. A better analogy would be a school explicitly having an "AAP only" scout troop, and then giving that scout troop preferred treatment. Yes, I would be offended by that. Let's face it: when even the majority of AAP parents think that what Keene Mill is doing is pretty shitty, then it's pretty shitty.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school is having a field trip just for the AAP kids.

If you're talking about Keene Mill, that trip is organized and pair for by the parents of the AAP kids, and not every AAP kid even goes on the trip. It is not run or paid for by the school.

You're proving the point of the OP, though. The fact that parents and kids there desire an "AAP only" field trip shows that they're being elitist and promoting separation.

Without knowing all the facts you have jump to conclusion! Keene Mill AAP class has students from seven (7) feeder schools. If few parents AAP decides to have field trip why do they need to invite other classes? Most likely parents from these feeder schools knows only AAP parents through parties etc. Maybe they wanted to keep group small, Maybe non-aap had their own field trip or didn't want to participate? Don't all field trips like these goes through PTA?

Do you get offended when scout troops has their own field trips and all non-scout students are not invited? Stop over analyzing!!

\

Just stop. You're not helping your case at all, but instead you're reinforcing the idea that AAP kids need to be isolated from gen ed kids. I would be horrified if my kids were invited to an AAP only field trip, just as I would be horrified if they were so isolated from the gen ed kids that they didn't count any of them among their friends. If it's a party among friends, stick with that. If it's a party only for Ms. Larla's class, that's fine. Turning the whole thing into an AAP parents and kids only want to associate with other AAP parents and kids smacks of exactly the type of elitism from the OP.

Also, your analogy to scout field trips is poor, as scouts are a self-selected group with reasonably equal access. A better analogy would be a school explicitly having an "AAP only" scout troop, and then giving that scout troop preferred treatment. Yes, I would be offended by that. Let's face it: when even the majority of AAP parents think that what Keene Mill is doing is pretty shitty, then it's pretty shitty.

+1

-1

[Anonymous]

Some of this really depends on personalities. My DC is in AAP, switched schools this year. We have maintained old friendships and I have not seen any difference in how we are viewed or how DC views others. Our friends are supportive and treat it like an immersion program or something. They may feel differently, but I do think close friends at least would have said something to let us know.

Like another PP, we talk with DC a lot about fit. This seems similar to me to travel sports, which I really don't hear people complaining about. What's the difference? Each is about challenging kids appropriately, right?

In any case, as I said, we haven't run into any issues. But I have a neighbor who is in the same position. She deals with the same people I do and she has numerous examples of how these same people were rude to her or had negative things to say about AAP or "felt insecure". I try not to get into these discussions with her, but it's clear that AAP is her identity and yeah, I'm sure she's coming off like a jerk.

I am an FCPS teacher, and I see lots of kids who were not AAP go on to AP classes and amazing colleges. It's mostly about hard work, regardless of what elementary program you land in. AAP doesn't mean much in the long run.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I am an FCPS teacher, and I see lots of kids who were not AAP go on to AP classes and amazing colleges. It's mostly about hard work, regardless of what elementary program you land in. AAP doesn't mean much in the long run.

It's not just about hard work, though. The correlation between being in the top 3% at age 7 and being in the top 3% in high school is much weaker than people would like to think. Some kids are early peakers, and others are late bloomers. This study shows that over half of the kids who test in the top 3% one year will fail to land in the top 3% the following year. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ746292.pdf

I'm not sure what the solution is for this with respect to AAP. The holistic approach should help somewhat, in that high test scores + high academic performance is more reliable than high test scores alone. Still, labeling kids as "gifted" or "not gifted" at age 7, and then having that label stick for another 6 years could be damaging for those kids who are early peakers or later bloomers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I am an FCPS teacher, and I see lots of kids who were not AAP go on to AP classes and amazing colleges. It's mostly about hard work, regardless of what elementary program you land in. AAP doesn't mean much in the long run.

It's not just about hard work, though. The correlation between being in the top 3% at age 7 and being in the top 3% in high school is much weaker than people would like to think. Some kids are early peakers, and others are late bloomers. This study shows that over half of the kids who test in the top 3% one year will fail to land in the top 3% the following year. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ746292.pdf

I'm not sure what the solution is for this with respect to AAP. The holistic approach should help somewhat, in that high test scores + high academic performance is more reliable than high test scores alone. Still, labeling kids as "gifted" or "not gifted" at age 7, and then having that label stick for another 6 years could be damaging for those kids who are early peakers or later bloomers.

The label isn't helpful but the service is. Would it have been better if Fairfax changed the name to Honors? Or Intensified?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The label isn't helpful but the service is. Would it have been better if Fairfax changed the name to Honors? Or Intensified?

It's more the permanence of the label and service that is the problem. Later bloomers can gain the label and service by applying in upper elementary, but some of these may fall through the cracks. Likewise, kids who were labeled in 2nd grade and thus are entitled to gifted programming through 8th might end up being pretty average by 8th. The connotation with Honors or Intensified is that a child can elect those classes on a yearly basis, such that there's no stigma in dropping from Honors to regular. AAP is all-or-nothing spanning 6 years, and there is stigma in dropping out of it, even if the child is struggling to keep up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

What if it's not that AAP creates unhelpful elitism and separation, but that we were already elitists and separatists to begin with? So much so that AAP appeals to us intrinsically so that we would want to move here to begin with? And that some people who move here for other reasons become horrified at the prospect of it but because it's really hard to find housing with public transportation in the area, we just stick around and feed into the system anyway?

AAP is not the end all be all. But because there is a pervasive competitive parenting thing in this county, it becomes that.

Mostly agree with this. When DC was two years old, we moved to our neighborhood because the schools were supposed to be really good, making the trade off of getting a lot less house for our money. We didn't do it specifically for AAP, but if it's there, it's hard not to care about it or be secretly competitive about it. Surely, not every parent is this way, but I would imagine a lot of posters on this board are, including me. (I wish I weren't, but at least I am self aware about it.) Deep down, I know that AAP doesn't matter for my child in the long run, but given that the program is so big and the education is supposedly so good, that's where I want my kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The label isn't helpful but the service is. Would it have been better if Fairfax changed the name to Honors? Or Intensified?

It's more the permanence of the label and service that is the problem. Later bloomers can gain the label and service by applying in upper elementary, but some of these may fall through the cracks. Likewise, kids who were labeled in 2nd grade and thus are entitled to gifted programming through 8th might end up being pretty average by 8th. The connotation with Honors or Intensified is that a child can elect those classes on a yearly basis, such that there's no stigma in dropping from Honors to regular. AAP is all-or-nothing spanning 6 years, and there is stigma in dropping out of it, even if the child is struggling to keep up.

It's not clear to me why they created and are expanding the AAP track in MS. It seems to be parallel and sometimes identical to Honors. I suspect it has to do with the difference between test-in and open Honors classes, which is contrary to your argument.

My perspective is that of a parent of a gifted elementary student who is disengaged, dislikes school, and needs some sort of gifted program to engage him until MS/HS. I'm not sure that AAP is the best way to go about having a GT program, but it's what Fairfax has.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The label isn't helpful but the service is. Would it have been better if Fairfax changed the name to Honors? Or Intensified?

It's more the permanence of the label and service that is the problem. Later bloomers can gain the label and service by applying in upper elementary, but some of these may fall through the cracks. Likewise, kids who were labeled in 2nd grade and thus are entitled to gifted programming through 8th might end up being pretty average by 8th. The connotation with Honors or Intensified is that a child can elect those classes on a yearly basis, such that there's no stigma in dropping from Honors to regular. AAP is all-or-nothing spanning 6 years, and there is stigma in dropping out of it, even if the child is struggling to keep up.

It's not clear to me why they created and are expanding the AAP track in MS. It seems to be parallel and sometimes identical to Honors. I suspect it has to do with the difference between test-in and open Honors classes, which is contrary to your argument.

If the AAP and honors classes are effectively the same, then there's no reason at all to have separate classes, other than elitism. If they're not the same, then it's silly to use labeling and testing on 7 year olds as being predictive of their academic standing and needs in middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP. I live in Fairfax County. It is the only school system my kids have ever been in. I have concerns about the AAP program, some similar to yours.

One of my kids tested into AAP. We didn't enroll him. He stayed at his base school in Level III where he was happy and content. The other wasn't even close to testing in. They never felt "not smart" or separated because once the AAP-obsessed families left the school, all that drama went with them.

Both my kids are now in high school and have gotten fantastic educations. They took honors classes starting in middle school. They have grades that would make any parent proud. The older is set to graduate with an IB diploma (the one who didn't test in) and knocked the SATs out of the park. Both kids have never been treated as "less" by a teacher or fellow student since leaving elementary school.

The AAP program brings out the absolute worst in people at the elementary school level, but once you move past it, it's done. Really, it's a non-issue after sixth grade and the hullabaloo seems really, really ridiculous in the rearview mirror. I suspect many of the most obnoxious posters on this page will look back and cringe in a few years when they realize how little all of this truly matters.

Move here. It's a great school system with much to offer beyond AAP.

This is nice to hear. I've never really been able to put my finger on what makes me feel uncomfortable about AAP. I think it's partially because I went to a very small high school where there were opportunities to take advanced classes, but you still took many classes with all of the "regular" kids in the school. It wasn't diverse racially, but it was diverse in terms of socio-economics, academic ability, special needs, behavioral problems, etc. I have no idea if my kids will qualify for AAP although one is doing very well in school. If the opportunity does present itself, I'm leaning towards keeping them in our base school. I want to stay part of the local neighborhood/community. And I don't want to get caught up in the competitive drama. I've also heard AAP can lead to a lot of complex decisions down the road if you have to choose between two options for middle school. I believe that smart kids will do well no matter what school they're in (especially if we're talking one FCPS school vs. another) and the AAP drama may not be worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fairfax seems unusual in its labelling and separation (even to the point of sending kids to alternate schools) of gifted kids. Arlington and Falls Church City integrate them into the classrooms and enable differentiation on a subject by subject basis, as well as based on whether a kid wants to choose to push themselves, with the teacher's permission (even if they didn't test well). Similarly, they integrate special needs children. In Falls Church City, my son has children with down syndrome, cerebralpalsy, and brilliant (off the charts) smart kids all together. There is very low teacher/student ratio (the special needs kids have one-on-one attendants) so that everyone's needs are met but children are not labelled and separated. I much prefer the integration.

An earlier poster said that parents play a role and that is true to a point. Kids see the obvious. If a kid is tested and then separated from their peers because they did well, there is an inevitable superiority they will have that no amount of parental discussion will change. It will become clear to them that smart kids benefit and are separated, and that they are not one of the smart kids. That will, in turn, affect their worldview of themselves and what they believe they can achieve. The sad thing is that many studies show that brilliance doesn't lead to success - effort matters more. The Fairfax system of (based solely on tests) labelling and separating kids will harm them in the long run.

You hit the nail on the head. My two oldest are now in HS. One came up through the AAP program and the other did not. To all you parents with younger kids worrying about this for one minute, just stop. It all evens out by middle school and high school. We know AAP kids who dropped out of TJ, AP classes, or the IB program and know exactly as many Gen Ed kids who are academically at the top of their class now. In the end, effort will make the difference. I wish I knew this years ago so I could tell my non AAP kid (who was reminded constantly by classmates she was "not smart", etc etc) that it all eventually evens out and to let comments roll off her back. The only damage done by the AAP program is the seed that is planted very young that a kid "isn't as smart" and that is just not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I am an FCPS teacher, and I see lots of kids who were not AAP go on to AP classes and amazing colleges. It's mostly about hard work, regardless of what elementary program you land in. AAP doesn't mean much in the long run.

It's not just about hard work, though. The correlation between being in the top 3% at age 7 and being in the top 3% in high school is much weaker than people would like to think. Some kids are early peakers, and others are late bloomers. This study shows that over half of the kids who test in the top 3% one year will fail to land in the top 3% the following year. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ746292.pdf

I'm not sure what the solution is for this with respect to AAP. The holistic approach should help somewhat, in that high test scores + high academic performance is more reliable than high test scores alone. Still, labeling kids as "gifted" or "not gifted" at age 7, and then having that label stick for another 6 years could be damaging for those kids who are early peakers or later bloomers.

Spot on.