Just got AAP screening file from AAP teacher and My DC's GBRS was 9, NAT 145 and VQN 93.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well... apparently the child IS bored as he says he is bored, yet he scored in the 99th percentile. And his teacher says that he just doesn't see the point of putting a lot of effort into it.... yet, give him a math test/problem and he is often able to answer faster (and more correctly) than his older sibling in 3rd grade adv. math. So, yes, you can call it bored or not engaged or just poor attention in class... but that's what he shows during the school day despite reading above grade level and having superior test scores.

I hate when parents claim kids are bored in class.

Gifted children are never bored in class. Because gifted children are constantly investigating and inquiring and picking things up and looking at them from different angles (metaphorically speaking). Being bored in class is actually a marker of non-giftedness.

You tell 'em, sista!!!!!! Soooo true!

This.

My ds has never complained of boredom in school...even when he was being taught letters two years after he learned to read. In his mind, there is always something else to discover or some other way to look at something. He has always managed to find a way to tweak assignments to make them more challenging. This was actually mentioned in his GBRS.

My DD as well - I was frustrated in K and 1, because she was beyond end of year benchmarks at the beginning of the year, I thought "how can she NOT be bored?!" She, on the other hand, was as happy as could be. I learned to chill out and appreciate that she was still finding ways to be very engaged. First kid. I'll be a super-relaxed seasoned pro by the time my 3rd child enters school.

[Anonymous]

In which case it should be open to all kids who can handle it. I say this as a parent whose oldest went through the program when it was still called GT (and not so many years ago) and whose younger kids went happily through our neighborhood school. Do you really think all kids who can work at an advanced pace or even the most qualified kids are currently in AAP? I've seen scores on this board-- both test and GBRS -- that wouldn't have come close to getting kids into the program just a few years ago, now routinely pushed by parents (and accepted by the screening committee apparently) as good enough because the kids are hard workers or bored. I don't think this matters at the elementary school level, but it definitely does bright kids an injustice in middle school. There, AAP kids get classes that prep them for high school and similarly intelligent kids who weren't pushed onto the fast track at 8, are stuck in classes like "Honors English" where there can be no required reading and assignments like writing a short story are deemed too advanced for them, but not their AAP (and often solely math-talented) peers. This isn't just inequitable, it's not good for the kids. And here I mean both AAP and general ed, since they'll all be together in those 9th grade honors classes excepting the miniscule % that go to TJ.

Yes, I have strong feelings about this, but I also have experience seeing kids (and not just mine) go through both systems. It's been my impression that many of the folks who worry about this the most are parents of younger children and don't fully understand how all this plays out. The system should not be set up so that some kids get special attention to the detriment of others who are at least as capable. If you go back to AAP centers as only for the truly gifted who do learn differently, that's one thing, but the current system is not only poor educational policy, it's unfair.


I'm all for honors classes at the elementary school level instead of this pseudo gifted program. I think, as with higher grades, elementary school kids work a different levels and expecting every teacher to differentiate when sometimes there are huge discrepancies starting even in k is crazy. I would have been perfectly happy with that and would have kept DC at base school if that option was available. DC is a good fit for AAP as it is now, but you could get the same results with honors at base school. The current AAP program is not serving profoundly gifted kids in any meaningful way other than giving them a faster pace. DC is not profoundly gifted, but base school also wasn't the best fit either. Current AAP is, they should just call it what it is and send it back to the base schools. This way kids could be in honors in all subjects or some depending on the child's strengths and it would be fair because it would be open to all who can handle it instead of just for a select few.

I'm not sure if this would fall into "tracking" too young, but it just makes more sense. They could then have a true gifted program for profoundly gifted kids, but given some of the posts on here, we'd be back to where we started in a couple years because every child would become profoundly gifted and be pushed into the new program.

[Anonymous]

Hmm, I think it's been two different tests for a while. They've gone back and forth over the years between administering them both in second grade and splitting them between first and second. In the late 90's, they gave one in first, one in second grade, at some point they switched to both in second, and now they're back to one in first, one in second.

In the past, did they give the Otis-Lennon instead of the CogAT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hmm, I think it's been two different tests for a while. They've gone back and forth over the years between administering them both in second grade and splitting them between first and second. In the late 90's, they gave one in first, one in second grade, at some point they switched to both in second, and now they're back to one in first, one in second.

In the past, did they give the Otis-Lennon instead of the CogAT?

Yes, in the past they did give the Otis-Lennon.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/column/columnlevelIV.shtml

[Anonymous]

OP: would you recommend to go for WISC or wait for the final decision? thanks,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amazing all the different stories. Our DD had 114 nnat, 117 COGat, a5 WISC: 7 GBRS. In AAP and doing well. Makes you kind of wonder if there really is any logic behind the decisions.

actully makes me wonder even more what is the purpose of an AAP Center

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amazing all the different stories. Our DD had 114 nnat, 117 COGat, a5 WISC: 7 GBRS. In AAP and doing well. Makes you kind of wonder if there really is any logic behind the decisions.

actully makes me wonder even more what is the purpose of an AAP Center

I'll say. Especially given that non-AAP schools are likely full of kids with these scores. Remind me again, why some bright kids are more equal than others?

[Anonymous]

Nnat, 126, FAT, 97 VQN, GBRS, 12. Good enough?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, if that's right, then I think centers are no longer necessary, except for the profoundly gifted. I have a child in a center who would do fine in the base school if the program was accelerated like it is at the center. There are a few kids at the center who do really "need" a center, but it's not the 16% that is there now. PErhaps they should have local level IV for everyone except the PG and send them to centers. I guess the problem is that everyone on here would decide their kid is PG.

FCPS??? There is no need for this absurd waste of a program. Leave the smart kids where they belong in their base schools with just another level of differentiation so instead of three level the teachers would teach four (about 4 kids per class). This would stop the favoritism and truly offer the best available education to all kids by allowing students to move in and out based on ability. It would also eliminate the incredibly difficult game of maneuvering a ridiculous, biased, preferential, subjective process that in itself excludes. Top 1% is all that needs a special classroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, if that's right, then I think centers are no longer necessary, except for the profoundly gifted. I have a child in a center who would do fine in the base school if the program was accelerated like it is at the center. There are a few kids at the center who do really "need" a center, but it's not the 16% that is there now. PErhaps they should have local level IV for everyone except the PG and send them to centers. I guess the problem is that everyone on here would decide their kid is PG.

FCPS??? There is no need for this absurd waste of a program. Leave the smart kids where they belong in their base schools with just another level of differentiation so instead of three level the teachers would teach four (about 4 kids per class). This would stop the favoritism and truly offer the best available education to all kids by allowing students to move in and out based on ability. It would also eliminate the incredibly difficult game of maneuvering a ridiculous, biased, preferential, subjective process that in itself excludes. Top 1% is all that needs a special classroom.

So what happens at schools where there are four classes in a grade level and there are three Center eligible kids in the entire grade?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, if that's right, then I think centers are no longer necessary, except for the profoundly gifted. I have a child in a center who would do fine in the base school if the program was accelerated like it is at the center. There are a few kids at the center who do really "need" a center, but it's not the 16% that is there now. PErhaps they should have local level IV for everyone except the PG and send them to centers. I guess the problem is that everyone on here would decide their kid is PG.

FCPS??? There is no need for this absurd waste of a program. Leave the smart kids where they belong in their base schools with just another level of differentiation so instead of three level the teachers would teach four (about 4 kids per class). This would stop the favoritism and truly offer the best available education to all kids by allowing students to move in and out based on ability. It would also eliminate the incredibly difficult game of maneuvering a ridiculous, biased, preferential, subjective process that in itself excludes. Top 1% is all that needs a special classroom.

So what happens at schools where there are four classes in a grade level and there are three Center eligible kids in the entire grade?

differentiation. it is what they are doing now!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, if that's right, then I think centers are no longer necessary, except for the profoundly gifted. I have a child in a center who would do fine in the base school if the program was accelerated like it is at the center. There are a few kids at the center who do really "need" a center, but it's not the 16% that is there now. PErhaps they should have local level IV for everyone except the PG and send them to centers. I guess the problem is that everyone on here would decide their kid is PG.

FCPS??? There is no need for this absurd waste of a program. Leave the smart kids where they belong in their base schools with just another level of differentiation so instead of three level the teachers would teach four (about 4 kids per class). This would stop the favoritism and truly offer the best available education to all kids by allowing students to move in and out based on ability. It would also eliminate the incredibly difficult game of maneuvering a ridiculous, biased, preferential, subjective process that in itself excludes. Top 1% is all that needs a special classroom.

So what happens at schools where there are four classes in a grade level and there are three Center eligible kids in the entire grade?

It is not about "center eligibility. Read the previous post! Just about any Tom , Dick and Sally can be center eligible if they "flutter" the right teachers "attention". Your child doesn't need a different school under the current "center eligibility". Only the top 1% need that. The special needs children need special teachers. The truly gifted need a special curriculum. Smart kids need differentiation just as the middle and lower level. It should be about getting the most from every child by allowing them open access to reach their highest potential. The AAP program as it is now Does Not Even Come Close! The solution is obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, if that's right, then I think centers are no longer necessary, except for the profoundly gifted. I have a child in a center who would do fine in the base school if the program was accelerated like it is at the center. There are a few kids at the center who do really "need" a center, but it's not the 16% that is there now. PErhaps they should have local level IV for everyone except the PG and send them to centers. I guess the problem is that everyone on here would decide their kid is PG.

FCPS??? There is no need for this absurd waste of a program. Leave the smart kids where they belong in their base schools with just another level of differentiation so instead of three level the teachers would teach four (about 4 kids per class). This would stop the favoritism and truly offer the best available education to all kids by allowing students to move in and out based on ability. It would also eliminate the incredibly difficult game of maneuvering a ridiculous, biased, preferential, subjective process that in itself excludes. Top 1% is all that needs a special classroom.

So what happens at schools where there are four classes in a grade level and there are three Center eligible kids in the entire grade?

It is not about "center eligibility. Read the previous post! Just about any Tom , Dick and Sally can be center eligible if they "flutter" the right teachers "attention". Your child doesn't need a different school under the current "center eligibility". Only the top 1% need that. The special needs children need special teachers. The truly gifted need a special curriculum. Smart kids need differentiation just as the middle and lower level. It should be about getting the most from every child by allowing them open access to reach their highest potential. The AAP program as it is now Does Not Even Come Close! The solution is obvious.

And that's the four Center eligible kids I am referring to.

So just $crew them since they happen to be at a school that doesn't have other kids in the same 1%?

[Anonymous]

^^ should be three kids in four classes in one grade

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ should be three kids in four classes in one grade

correct!