Anonymous wrote:Not all the time. Do center schools do this though? Fill with LLIII children? If not, why shouldn't they as well?

I think they should let their inbound LLIII students take some of their core courses with the Center students. That would help mitigate the 'two schools under one roof' feeling that people post.

Not all the time. Do center schools do this though? Fill with LLIII children? If not, why shouldn't they as well?

Anonymous wrote:Also LLIV classes are asked to fill their classrooms with non-AAP students so why should centers not have to as well?

Usually they ARE AAP students, just LIII and not LIV.

Anonymous wrote:Many of the AAP kids have a superiority complex and this manifests itself in places like the playground or cafeteria, where some are telling Gen Ed kids that they're not in the "smart" class, etc. And before you and others jump in and say this behavior isn't happening, let me just say -- it is. My child has been told this and other parents of Gen Ed children have said similar things have happened to their kids. I don't know if it's the parents of AAP kids who are feeding this BS to their children, or if it's the kids themselves who have an over-inflated sense of self. But it's very dispiriting to be on the receiving end of those comments.

Have you raised this with the school at all? If this were happening to my kids, I would be in touch with the school counselor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AAP children can be taught with other independent and high achieving students. It's done in LLIV schools all the time and can be done in the centers too. A teacher shouldn't have to teach many, many different levels, but they can teach 2-3 levels during the year.

Would love to see teacher input on how "they can teach 2-3 levels during the year." PP, are you a teacher who has to do this?

I only know that our experience with "differentiation in the classroom" meant that kids who were able and ready to work at higher academic levels were the ones shortchanged as teachers had to focus mostly on meeting the needs of the rest of the class and getting the rest of the class's standardized test scores up to scratch. The kids who were ready for more challenges were not effectively challenged under "differentiation" and the differentiation often took the form of more worksheets (busy work) that these kids were left to do on their own "because you can handle it." This is very dispiriting to these kids. That's why we were glad to have the AAP option when the time came. That won't be popular with the anti-AAP posters on here, but nothing that is in any way positive about AAP ever is OK with them.

As for OP, way back many pages ago, if it's a center school, of course you have more AAP classrooms than general ed; kids are coming to the school from several other local elementary schools to fill those AAP classrooms. Sorry if you feel that their presence somehow sullies your "neighborhood school" experience, but I'm not sure why it would. Our center school had tons of interaction between AAP and general ed students, all the time, in "specials" classes, on the playground, on field trips--the school actively worked to create bonds between all kids in a grade, regardless of AAP or general ed status. If your school doesn't do that -- why not be the one to get it started?

OP here. Let me explain to you why having majority AAP kids at school "sullies" the atmosphere. Yes, it is a center school. But first and foremost, it is the neighborhood school for a lot of kids who aren't in AAP (but are no less bright). Many of the AAP kids have a superiority complex and this manifests itself in places like the playground or cafeteria, where some are telling Gen Ed kids that they're not in the "smart" class, etc. And before you and others jump in and say this behavior isn't happening, let me just say -- it is. My child has been told this and other parents of Gen Ed children have said similar things have happened to their kids. I don't know if it's the parents of AAP kids who are feeding this BS to their children, or if it's the kids themselves who have an over-inflated sense of self. But it's very dispiriting to be on the receiving end of those comments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AAP children can be taught with other independent and high achieving students. It's done in LLIV schools all the time and can be done in the centers too. A teacher shouldn't have to teach many, many different levels, but they can teach 2-3 levels during the year.

Would love to see teacher input on how "they can teach 2-3 levels during the year." PP, are you a teacher who has to do this?

As for OP, way back many pages ago, if it's a center school, of course you have more AAP classrooms than general ed; kids are coming to the school from several other local elementary schools to fill those AAP classrooms. Sorry if you feel that their presence somehow sullies your "neighborhood school" experience, but I'm not sure why it would. Our center school had tons of interaction between AAP and general ed students, all the time, in "specials" classes, on the playground, on field trips--the school actively worked to create bonds between all kids in a grade, regardless of AAP or general ed status. If your school doesn't do that -- why not be the one to get it started?

It does because the AAP students are getting more services than the GE students. Most parents feel that the GE students would be able to perform well with the AAP curriculum. This results in an inequity. It would be one thing if the AAP students were so advanced that they "needed" the extra resources. Most non-AAP parents do not believe this is the case. Also, the GE and AAP students do not mix much at our center. They have no special classes together and have lunch at different times. A couple of field trips within the year as an entire school doesn't do much to form a bond.

Why is FCPS keeping the advanced curriculum away from the GE? This needs to stop!

It's also very doubtful that children are getting smarter each year. If anything it's the other way round with all the pollution in this area. What is happening is that more children are testing higher and getting into AAP making that cutoff pretty arbitrary. Some children who make it probably should be down a level for one class at least and others who didn't probably could do ok working up a level.

Also LLIV classes are asked to fill their classrooms with non-AAP students so why should centers not have to as well?

9:52 What do you think the general ed teachers are already doing? What do you think they did before AAP started? What do you think teachers are doing in Arlington, Montgomery County, DC, etc? 5 different levels with 30 kids is one thing. 2-3 different levels with a class of 26 is manageable.

Anonymous wrote:AAP children can be taught with other independent and high achieving students. It's done in LLIV schools all the time and can be done in the centers too. A teacher shouldn't have to teach many, many different levels, but they can teach 2-3 levels during the year.

Would love to see teacher input on how "they can teach 2-3 levels during the year." PP, are you a teacher who has to do this?

I only know that our experience with "differentiation in the classroom" meant that kids who were able and ready to work at higher academic levels were the ones shortchanged as teachers had to focus mostly on meeting the needs of the rest of the class and getting the rest of the class's standardized test scores up to scratch. The kids who were ready for more challenges were not effectively challenged under "differentiation" and the differentiation often took the form of more worksheets (busy work) that these kids were left to do on their own "because you can handle it." This is very dispiriting to these kids. That's why we were glad to have the AAP option when the time came. That won't be popular with the anti-AAP posters on here, but nothing that is in any way positive about AAP ever is OK with them.

As for OP, way back many pages ago, if it's a center school, of course you have more AAP classrooms than general ed; kids are coming to the school from several other local elementary schools to fill those AAP classrooms. Sorry if you feel that their presence somehow sullies your "neighborhood school" experience, but I'm not sure why it would. Our center school had tons of interaction between AAP and general ed students, all the time, in "specials" classes, on the playground, on field trips--the school actively worked to create bonds between all kids in a grade, regardless of AAP or general ed status. If your school doesn't do that -- why not be the one to get it started?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be no classes where FCPS states that other children cannot be in. Class sizes are being skewed because AAP students at centers are being guaranteed a class with no other children besides other AAP students. AAP students should be guaranteed classes with other AAP students. That is as far as they should go. No other school should have greater class sizes because general ed and AAP students at center schools can't mix in the slightest.

What are you talking about? Music? Strings? PE? Those are all mixed between AAP and gen ed.

Or are you saying AAP and non-AAP should be mixed in the core subjects, math, science, writing, etc?

Not the OP, but that's exactly what needs to happen. If all manner of abilities can be mixed in the Gen Ed classes, why not mix the AAP kids in as well? Why is it that they are given their own classrooms and do not interact with other abilities in the core subjects, yet the typical Gen Ed student is expected to learn alongside kids with learning disablities/special needs?

Teachers have a hard enough time differentiating, that would be a disaster. I think they need to do tracking in Gen Ed also so the teachers can really help the kids according to where they are academically.

But what happens when the non-AAP kids are doing as well as the AAP kids? Can we mix then? AAP isn't very difficult. I think many gen ed kids would be able to perform at the same level.

Precisely what both our principal and AART have said. There is a misconception that AAP = gifted education. Totally false. It's just a faster-paced curriculum than the Gen Ed classes. It is not a curriculum for gifted kids, just kids who can go somewhat faster. Many Gen Ed kids could keep up just fine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AAP children can be taught with other independent and high achieving students. It's done in LLIV schools all the time and can be done in the centers too. A teacher shouldn't have to teach many, many different levels, but they can teach 2-3 levels during the year.

At our AAP center they are already teaching to at least 2 levels, on grade level above and 2+ grade levels above. I don't know if any kids are receiving grade level services other than review for the SOL.

I imagine with that giant 4th grade, the AAP teachers are teaching at least 3 levels, possibly 4 levels: slightly below grade level, at grade level, one level above and two levels above.

That's the problem with AAP. If you are slightly below grade level, you should not be allowed to stay. That's why tracking where your placement is based on performance each year would be better. I doubt that wii ever happen though because parents of kids in the lower groups would complain that their kids are unfairly disadvantaged.

A child could be slightly below grade level in one subject and two grade levels above in another subject.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AAP children can be taught with other independent and high achieving students. It's done in LLIV schools all the time and can be done in the centers too. A teacher shouldn't have to teach many, many different levels, but they can teach 2-3 levels during the year.

At our AAP center they are already teaching to at least 2 levels, on grade level above and 2+ grade levels above. I don't know if any kids are receiving grade level services other than review for the SOL.

I imagine with that giant 4th grade, the AAP teachers are teaching at least 3 levels, possibly 4 levels: slightly below grade level, at grade level, one level above and two levels above.

That's the problem with AAP. If you are slightly below grade level, you should not be allowed to stay. That's why tracking where your placement is based on performance each year would be better. I doubt that wii ever happen though because parents of kids in the lower groups would complain that their kids are unfairly disadvantaged.

Anonymous wrote:AAP children can be taught with other independent and high achieving students. It's done in LLIV schools all the time and can be done in the centers too. A teacher shouldn't have to teach many, many different levels, but they can teach 2-3 levels during the year.

At our AAP center they are already teaching to at least 2 levels, on grade level above and 2+ grade levels above. I don't know if any kids are receiving grade level services other than review for the SOL.

I imagine with that giant 4th grade, the AAP teachers are teaching at least 3 levels, possibly 4 levels: slightly below grade level, at grade level, one level above and two levels above.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There should be no classes where FCPS states that other children cannot be in. Class sizes are being skewed because AAP students at centers are being guaranteed a class with no other children besides other AAP students. AAP students should be guaranteed classes with other AAP students. That is as far as they should go. No other school should have greater class sizes because general ed and AAP students at center schools can't mix in the slightest.

What are you talking about? Music? Strings? PE? Those are all mixed between AAP and gen ed.

Or are you saying AAP and non-AAP should be mixed in the core subjects, math, science, writing, etc?

Not the OP, but that's exactly what needs to happen. If all manner of abilities can be mixed in the Gen Ed classes, why not mix the AAP kids in as well? Why is it that they are given their own classrooms and do not interact with other abilities in the core subjects, yet the typical Gen Ed student is expected to learn alongside kids with learning disablities/special needs?

Teachers have a hard enough time differentiating, that would be a disaster. I think they need to do tracking in Gen Ed also so the teachers can really help the kids according to where they are academically.

But what happens when the non-AAP kids are doing as well as the AAP kids? Can we mix then? AAP isn't very difficult. I think many gen ed kids would be able to perform at the same level.