So you are King of FCPS AAP for a day . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK. Lets be honest folks. So much of what happens at the school depends on the principal. Period. Some schools have 2 or more ESOL teachers and only a part time AART. Hmmm, where's the focus and on whom, exactly?

The general ed. education is not tiered, as it should be, and it is too diverse on every level.

Our principal is 99% focused on minority and ESOL kids, even though the majority of our school is Caucasian, not FARMS, and speaks fluent English. Last year, a parent inquired about running an after school program for language that would require use of the computer lab. School (administration) replied that this was a no go as our school utilizes the computer lab for English instruction for ESOL. Really? Kids already get ESOL instruction during the school day. Can't we please use it to teach our kids a second language? Another, the parents wanted FLES a few years back, as it was opened to all ES, Principal need only request. Again, no thank you, we have ESOL students who are learning English and this would be too much for them.

So, yes, I encourage all to appeal and fight like hell if rejected, if you want your child to get a decent education in a system that continually favors to the minority (in numbers).

Clearly you have no idea how schools are staffed. The principal is assigned a part-time AART based on the number of students at the school. He or she doesn't even interview them. As for ESOL, those positions are given to the school based on a formula. The principal does have flexibility in who is hired and can decide to use those positions as straight up classroom teachers or as ESOL resource teachers that serve students across several classrooms.

Then how did my boys' ES always have a fulltime AAP/GT teacher on staff? Since at least 2002?

Because the size of your school meant that a full-time AART was warranted. I was responding to the poster who was inferring that a part-time AART was the result of a principal's decision. As I re-read my post, I see that should have changed the verb tense to say "The principal WAS assigned a part-time AART..." I apologize for the confusion. Note that if the principal has additional funding or positions to "trade in" he/she can "buy" an AART position. So a half-time AART could become full-time at a school if the principal has the resources and the desire to fund the other half of the position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Plus, by the time kids start high school, the playing field is even once again. No one remembers or cares who was/wasn't in AAP and students are free to choose whichever class level they prefer. Being in AAP during elementary and middle school has no bearing on high school students' success.

I couldn't disagree more. The appropriateness of a child's early educational experiences has a great deal to do with his or her success in high school.

I disagree. My two sons didn't come alive academically until late middle school when they surged by AAP kids they have continued to outpace in high school. With active boys in particular, I think having the focus to sit still for 6-7 hours/day often doesn't come until then. And I would not have had it differently.

Very true in our experience as well. By high school, many of the previously AAP kids are burned out and kids who were "just" in Gen Ed during elementary school often have a surge at that point. AAP is just a label -- kids will succeed (or not) based on many other factors.

Exactly what do you think would "burn out" an AAP kid? It's not rocket science that they're teaching. It's just the same old word study homework crap they do in gen Ed.

I have one kid at an AAP center, and one at our base school, and in all honesty, the gen Ed kid has more homework.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK. Lets be honest folks. So much of what happens at the school depends on the principal. Period. Some schools have 2 or more ESOL teachers and only a part time AART. Hmmm, where's the focus and on whom, exactly?

The general ed. education is not tiered, as it should be, and it is too diverse on every level.

Our principal is 99% focused on minority and ESOL kids, even though the majority of our school is Caucasian, not FARMS, and speaks fluent English. Last year, a parent inquired about running an after school program for language that would require use of the computer lab. School (administration) replied that this was a no go as our school utilizes the computer lab for English instruction for ESOL. Really? Kids already get ESOL instruction during the school day. Can't we please use it to teach our kids a second language? Another, the parents wanted FLES a few years back, as it was opened to all ES, Principal need only request. Again, no thank you, we have ESOL students who are learning English and this would be too much for them.

So, yes, I encourage all to appeal and fight like hell if rejected, if you want your child to get a decent education in a system that continually favors to the minority (in numbers).

Clearly you have no idea how schools are staffed. The principal is assigned a part-time AART based on the number of students at the school. He or she doesn't even interview them. As for ESOL, those positions are given to the school based on a formula. The principal does have flexibility in who is hired and can decide to use those positions as straight up classroom teachers or as ESOL resource teachers that serve students across several classrooms.

Then how did my boys' ES always have a fulltime AAP/GT teacher on staff? Since at least 2002?

Because the size of your school meant that a full-time AART was warranted. I was responding to the poster who was inferring that a part-time AART was the result of a principal's decision. As I re-read my post, I see that should have changed the verb tense to say "The principal WAS assigned a part-time AART..." I apologize for the confusion. Note that if the principal has additional funding or positions to "trade in" he/she can "buy" an AART position. So a half-time AART could become full-time at a school if the principal has the resources and the desire to fund the other half of the position.

The school was barely 500 kids at the time and we did not quality for a full time Art or AART/GT teacher. The poster to whom I was replying, implied that a Principal could NOT increase an AART teacher's hours as they were decided elsewhere. Based on my experience that is incorrect. Our Principal moved things around so we had a full time Art teacher and a full time AART/GT teacher. I think he depleted his teacher continuing education/training budget to do it, and the PTA replenished that.

[Anonymous]

Exactly what do you think would "burn out" an AAP kid? It's not rocket science that they're teaching. It's just the same old word study homework crap they do in gen Ed.

I have one kid at an AAP center, and one at our base school, and in all honesty, the gen Ed kid has more homework.

Gen Ed. kids typically should have more homework since on average it takes more repetitions for them to "get" a topic than a typical "gifted" student. The reason AAP kids often burn out is that many of them are not gifted, so they're not getting the extra homework and as the years progress, the class is moving too quickly for them, hence the tutors and additional hours they often need to keep up with the truly brilliant kids. Not to mention the pressures inherent in AAP culture to be ahead in math and taking advanced courses.

[Anonymous]

I "experience" the sun comming up and circling the sky every day, But that doesn't mean the sun revolves around the earth. One's experience does not a fact make--is just anectdotal. A scientific approach would be to compare grades/test scores between GE and AAP and see how they compare, while controlling for other factors such as income, age, parents education, and so forth.

[Anonymous]

Go back to the "GT" levels FCPS used in the 80s/90s. It was truly the top 1% or 2% - scores and teacher recommendations. I have seen GT/AAP decline since I was a student in FCPS. I did not send my DS to the AAP center despite his 152 scores. It's just a packed classroom. We stuck with language immersion, at least he's getting a lifelong skill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Go back to more stringent requirements so that only 3-5% are in Centers. That would allow the Centers to meet the needs of the gifted who they were historically designed for and would take care of overcrowding and hurt feelings among the non-AAP students.

+1 and have more challenging courses for the GE students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK. Lets be honest folks. So much of what happens at the school depends on the principal. Period. Some schools have 2 or more ESOL teachers and only a part time AART. Hmmm, where's the focus and on whom, exactly?

The general ed. education is not tiered, as it should be, and it is too diverse on every level.

Our principal is 99% focused on minority and ESOL kids, even though the majority of our school is Caucasian, not FARMS, and speaks fluent English. Last year, a parent inquired about running an after school program for language that would require use of the computer lab. School (administration) replied that this was a no go as our school utilizes the computer lab for English instruction for ESOL. Really? Kids already get ESOL instruction during the school day. Can't we please use it to teach our kids a second language? Another, the parents wanted FLES a few years back, as it was opened to all ES, Principal need only request. Again, no thank you, we have ESOL students who are learning English and this would be too much for them.

So, yes, I encourage all to appeal and fight like hell if rejected, if you want your child to get a decent education in a system that continually favors to the minority (in numbers).

+1000 I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK. Lets be honest folks. So much of what happens at the school depends on the principal. Period. Some schools have 2 or more ESOL teachers and only a part time AART. Hmmm, where's the focus and on whom, exactly?

The general ed. education is not tiered, as it should be, and it is too diverse on every level.

Our principal is 99% focused on minority and ESOL kids, even though the majority of our school is Caucasian, not FARMS, and speaks fluent English. Last year, a parent inquired about running an after school program for language that would require use of the computer lab. School (administration) replied that this was a no go as our school utilizes the computer lab for English instruction for ESOL. Really? Kids already get ESOL instruction during the school day. Can't we please use it to teach our kids a second language? Another, the parents wanted FLES a few years back, as it was opened to all ES, Principal need only request. Again, no thank you, we have ESOL students who are learning English and this would be too much for them.

So, yes, I encourage all to appeal and fight like hell if rejected, if you want your child to get a decent education in a system that continually favors to the minority (in numbers).

Suspicious of this. I'm a language teacher and though computers are certainly a useful aid to language learning, they're not required. Speaking, hearing and being exposed to the new language is what's required. There are plenty of useful online programs and language software that can be accessed at home by Caucasian, not FARMS kids. Give the students who need ESOL a break -- knowing English is required to learn in U.S. schools, knowing a foreign language isn't. I don't know what this principal was dealing with, but it sounds like it was kids who were needing some very basics. I say this also as a parent who moved here from Asia with American kids who had been studying Chinese for three. I was frustrated by the lack of foreign language offerings at elementary schools (and agree they should be there, at all schools)....our school ultimately started up a Spanish program and under the theory that studying any language was a good thing, I signed them up for that for two years. It was after school and a complete battle. Very soon the kids understood it was an optional thing that their friends weren't doing. They never treated it like a class and never got much out of it. I gave up after that and waited till middle school. Oldest resumed Chinese and has traveled there on a scholarship program. Second child is now doing Spanish and loving it. I've no doubt both will stick with their language and eventually go overseas to truly become fluent. Elementary school classes would have helped, but are certainly not having them is not a show-stopper for serious language students.

+1000 I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would eliminate appeals completely

+1

My DC scored on the 99% for NNAT and 97% for FxAT (at or higher than 97% of the kids in Fairfax county!) but being denied. Why shouldn't we appeal?

[Anonymous]

13:50 I am not lying. The parent wanted to use computer assisted language learning for Chinese for an after school program; however, our school uses the computer lab after school for extra ESOL support. Not very fair to limit the computer lab to ESOL only, as majority of kids are not ESOL, but the after school programs are limited as a result of a very few.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would eliminate appeals completely

+1

My DC scored on the 99% for NNAT and 97% for FxAT (at or higher than 97% of the kids in Fairfax county!) but being denied. Why shouldn't we appeal?

I agree that appeals should be allowed. HOWEVER, I think the suggestion to limit where testing (such as WISC-IV) can be done for those appeals makes a great deal of sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:13:50 I am not lying. The parent wanted to use computer assisted language learning for Chinese for an after school program; however, our school uses the computer lab after school for extra ESOL support. Not very fair to limit the computer lab to ESOL only, as majority of kids are not ESOL, but the after school programs are limited as a result of a very few.

Not saying you were lying, but why couldn't the kids study Chinese in another room? Kids of Chinese Americans who live here study in regular classrooms. You don't need a computer lab to learn Chinese or any other language.

[Anonymous]

Because it was computer assisted, as I already stated.

[Anonymous]

Why couldn't the ESOL kids use a regular classroom? They already have instruction during the day.