Reply to The difference btw the AAP class and the General Ed class

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "The difference btw the AAP class and the General Ed class"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]^I am speaking from personal experience.  It wasn’t an advanced class but a class only offered at the school virtually.  It was a simple “Sorry, it’s filled.” They gave my kid two other completely unrelated options that would fit in his schedule.  It’s about what fits in, not what you want at that point.  We certainly weren’t demanding a class spot and bus transportation.  Lesson learned, we are already researching other virtual options outside of FCPS for next year.

[b]I firmly think they need to stop the transportation for AAP centers and one of mine went through AAP but stayed at the base school.  There are so many other things to spend the money on.[/b]  [/quote]

No way they’re going to do this. It’s an equity issue. You’d basically be excluding all the kids whose parents don’t have the resources to drive them every day. [/quote]

Okay. But there are centers that have every school with a Local Level 4. For example, every school that sends to Westbriar has a Local Level 4. Why should we be bussing kids when they can get a Level 4 class at their own school?[/quote]

The argument is that the Center schools allow for more classrooms so that the kids can be mixed up every year, just like the Gen Ed classes are shuffled every year. It is better for socialization for kids to have a larger cohort of kids and gives room to keep kids who clash apart.

I think the solution is that you have Advanced Math and Advanced LA in every school. Maybe it is Advanced Math and Science and Advanced LA and Social Studies since there are overlapping skill sets in the classes. Allow kids to move classes based on their areas of strength. Since many schoolshave 3 or more classrooms for each grade, you should be able to keep classes balanced in size and skill set. It would allow more kids to be challenged in their areas of strength. For even larger schools you would end up with 2 advanced classrooms for each of the areas.

The fluidity would be good for all kids and you wouldn’t have to worry about the cohort issues. You could also adjust the kids in each group annually so that kids who start to advance later in ES. It would also allow kids who were on the cusp and are struggling to be moved back into a group that works for them. You also remove the designation and hence the competitive aspect of LIV, that is ridiculous. LIII goes away, since there is Advanced LA, which allows the AART to do more with the LII type kids in K-2 and to provide support for the truly gifted kids who need more then Advanced Math or LA provides.

And you get rid of the Centers and busses and relieve over crowding at some of the Center schools. [/quote]

+100
I've been wishing they would do something like this for years.  
DP[/quote]

This was how my podunk ES did it in the 80's in of those open concept schools.  And by golly it worked.[/quote]

But this is tracking which is deemed Inequitable. There should be some sort of testing to determine who gets what but my suspicion is that it will be ignored. Fcps has already called out the low numbers of POC and low income in AAP and the goal is to even it out.  [/quote]

DP.  Isn't AAP simply tracking as well - but on a much greater scale?  In fact, sorting very young kids into two groups at age 7 is the very definition of tracking.  Flexible grouping would allow ALL children to progress at the pace that is right for them - moving up when ready, moving down when the work is too challenging.  AAP - and especially center schools - are blatant segregation.  [/quote]

Segregation and tracking are two different words.

And unfortunately, the state of Virginia requires a gifted program and this is how FCPS implements theirs.  So they have cover from your attack of tracking and segregation.  [/quote]

Except that it's not a "gifted" program and they very deliberately do not call it one.  And it is the very definition of segregation.[/quote]

FCPS is absolutely guilty of segregation, but that is accomplished by pyramid boundaries. I wouldn't fault AAP for that. If anything, AAP Centers are a temporary way out for capable kids that are stuck in hyper-segregated ES/MS zones. [/quote]

BS. Our Level IV center had equal numbers of kids in AAP and in gen ed. That's not gifted or more capable kids . . . it's separating kids out for very little reason, creating division and stereotyping, and is just unnecessary[/quote]

I can assure you that the kids in Level IV aren't there for "very little reason." They are the higher-performers who have proven that they can handle a faster, more advanced workload. If your kid can't, they can't, and there's nothing wrong with it. The problem with "creating division" comes from parent responses, not kid perceptions.[/quote]

And I can assure you that is the case. I have a very good friend who is an AAP teacher and even she agrees that there is very little reason for the separation. Most of those kids are in b/c of parents appealing, spending the money getting extra testing, etc. And I can also assure you the "gen ed" kids at our school DEFINITELY perceive the difference. And the non-AAP ones excelling in HS have def made comments about the fact that they are doing better than lots of AAP kids - I've heard it more than once. Maybe a bit of schadenfreude but . . . . I get it. They were treated like dumb "Gen Pop" miscreants all through ES and they didn't need to be.[/quote]

Oh, if you heard it from your very good friend.  :roll: [/quote]

You can eyeroll and not believe it b/c it doesn't fit your narrative. Doesn't mean that it's not true or change what my friend -an AAP teacher- has said.[/quote]

The last AAP audit actually calls out that one of FCPSs problem is that too many Teachers and Administrators didn’t understand what the program was for and thought that the program wasn’t needed. The educators hired to review the program didn’t recommend the program ends but recommended making sure that the Admin and Teachers better understand the program.

Our school added LLIV in the last few years mainly because it had too but the Teachers we spoke to before this all didn’t see the need for the program. Asking anyone for input when we were choosing between the base and Center was unproductive because the Teachers all said that the base, without LLIV. It was like the school wanted to prevent kids from leaving the base and were not looking at the needs of the kids who had been selected.

So no, I don’t trust and AAP Teacher saying the program isn’t needed mainly because I think FCPS runs it poorly and because most Teachers don’t see the need for the program. I suspect part of that is because too many kids are in the program and it is not reaching the kids who really need it because there are too many kids who would do fine in the Gen Ed program with proper differentiation.

I like the idea of an Advanced Math and Advanced LA class that kids can be assigned too and groups based on skill level. The class for kids who are behind and struggling should have a reading or math specialist assigned to it to help the Teacher meet those kids needs. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics