I hear about Haycock having three different level classes. How is the intended curriculum the same in this instance? Why isn't FCPS more up front about this?

Throwing around the idea of prioritizing placement of AAP teachers in schools with a "critical mass" of any group scares me. Sounds a lot like very bright kids in under-served/less privileged areas would get the short end of that stick.

Believe it or not when there are lots of kids with high ability in a given school the less they will NEED a different setting to succeed. Don't get me wrong they greatly benefit from AAP services but they have the benefit of peers to compete with and "better" school.

When you only have a few high ability kids in a lower performing school the likelihood is those gifted students truly NEED a different setting to tap into their full potential.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school does not offer Level IV at all. Just over 30 kids were found center eligible last year. Why not hire one AAP teacher, put them all in one class and keep them at the base school instead of relocating them?

Those 30 kids would be stuck with the same other kids for 4 years. And without other AAP classes, they can't have flexible grouping for math, etc, and would all be taught on the same level. For some kids, that's no better then general Ed.

Continue to offer Local Level IV as a choice. Just limit Local Level IV to the schools that have a critical mass.

Anonymous wrote:Our school does not offer Level IV at all. Just over 30 kids were found center eligible last year. Why not hire one AAP teacher, put them all in one class and keep them at the base school instead of relocating them?

+1

Place Local Level IV where the critical mass exists. Local Level IV should not be located at a school where there are just a handful of Center-eligible students.

Anonymous wrote:Our school does not offer Level IV at all. Just over 30 kids were found center eligible last year. Why not hire one AAP teacher, put them all in one class and keep them at the base school instead of relocating them?

Those 30 kids would be stuck with the same other kids for 4 years. And without other AAP classes, they can't have flexible grouping for math, etc, and would all be taught on the same level. For some kids, that's no better then general Ed.

Our school does not offer Level IV at all. Just over 30 kids were found center eligible last year. Why not hire one AAP teacher, put them all in one class and keep them at the base school instead of relocating them?

Anonymous wrote:
How does Local Level IV differ from the Full-time AAP Center?
The teachers in both settings are trained in gifted education and teach the same advanced academic curriculum to students who are ready for a highly challenging instructional program in the four core subject areas. The main difference is in the make-up of the class. All of the students in a full-time AAP center-based class have been identified as center-eligible by a central selection committee and will be coming from several neighborhood schools to comprise the center class. In a Local Level IV classroom, the students are a mix of students who are center-eligible and high achieving students who are capable of working at advanced levels, all enrolled in their local school.

This point makes a huge difference. A class that is fully comprised of center-eligible kids will move at a faster pace and explore a subject with greater depth than a mixed class can.
Yes, the teachers work from the same curriculum guidelines, but what happens in the actual classroom can vary greatly, depending on the interests of the students in the class and their ability to quickly grasp and work with new information.
Maybe you could talk to some teachers of both types of classes about what they see as the differences.

Anonymous wrote:The teachers in both settings are trained in gifted education and teach the same advanced academic curriculum to students who are ready for a highly challenging instructional program in the four core subject areas.

So is this an incorrect statement or not?

The intended curriculum is the same - true statement.

The teachers in both settings are trained in gifted education and teach the same advanced academic curriculum to students who are ready for a highly challenging instructional program in the four core subject areas.

So is this an incorrect statement or not?

Anonymous wrote:Can you please point me to a statement from FCPS that says these are different?

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/faqs/esfaqs.shtml

What are Local Level IV Services?
Local Level IV Services provide an important option for advanced learners who need the challenge of a full-time AAP center curriculum and do not want to leave their local school. They also provide another avenue of access for advanced academic services to students who may need to practice and strengthen their basic skills but have the capacity to think, reason, and problem solve at advanced levels.

How does Local Level IV differ from the Full-time AAP Center?
The teachers in both settings are trained in gifted education and teach the same advanced academic curriculum to students who are ready for a highly challenging instructional program in the four core subject areas. The main difference is in the make-up of the class. All of the students in a full-time AAP center-based class have been identified as center-eligible by a central selection committee and will be coming from several neighborhood schools to comprise the center class. In a Local Level IV classroom, the students are a mix of students who are center-eligible and high achieving students who are capable of working at advanced levels, all enrolled in their local school.

Many schools that offer Local Level IV services add students to the Level IV class in areas of academic strength through flexible grouping. This is an important avenue of access for students who have traditionally been underrepresented in advanced academic programs.

Will Local Level IV Services replace the existing full-time AAP center programs?
No, Local Level IV Services are not an attempt to close the existing full-time AAP centers; they are designed to provide access to the advanced academic level IV curriculum to more students. Families of eligible students have a choice about which option best meets their student's academic and social-emotional needs while access to curriculum and teachers trained in working with advanced learners is expanded to reach more students who are ready in areas of academic strength.

Does FCPS really admit that these are different? I don't see that listed anywhere. I see that they are supposed to teach the same curriculum. Can you please point me to a statement from FCPS that says these are different? I would like to see them state something other than having 2-3 classes at an AAP center verses 1 at a Local Level 4 and allowing Level 3 kids into local level IV classes. I really would like to know where they state the differences. So far I've only heard on this board about Haycock and Louise Archer having multilevel AAP classes which is more a matter of them being overcrowded than anything else since they should have been broken up years ago. AAP Centers throughout Fairfax County I'm not sure are all at that same level but maybe I'm wrong about this.

Local Level IV and Level IV Centers are not the same.

The quality is not nearly the same in most cases.

Local level IV programs are often not nearly as challenging as the center programs. FCPS acknowledges this by maintaining the choice of a center and providing transportation.

Why does FCPS give transportation to students that leave their base schools that offer Level IV AAP classes to go to a center school? The same opportunity is available at their base school? It seems a waste of money to pay for bus transportation for 5 to 10 kids to ride on a bus to a center school vs. riding their neighborhood bus to school and still being able to be in an advanced class.
Once an AAP level program is available at the base school, shouldn't the option to go to a center school be taken away?