Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay random on the internet. I'm sure your AART would publicly disagree with her employer. Mkay sure.

There.Are.No.Capacity.Limits.

AAP teachers have special certification to teach gifted children. There may not be enough children in each grade at each school to justify training teachers at each school.

If that isn’t the pot calling the kettle black. I’m sure I’m going to go by you, Rando, who claims to be the insider who knows whether or not there are limits. Because of course you know everything there is to know about AAP and how it all works. And even though there are no limits, a ton of kids who should’ve gotten in, didn’t get in. I’m sure you’re in the know alright.

does an AART publicly refute the statements put out by her employer, you bet they do when they are good at what they do. Sorry your experience hasn’t been so.

Sentiment is changing anyway. More and more parents now understand that there is a limit. We asked our Principal for placement for level 4 after the rejection. She informed us that there wasn’t capacity because central committee usually fills “all the spots”. There are other parents in our school also requesting the same. Other posters have mentioned it also in a different thread. Honestly I don’t understand why it’s so hard to acknowledge that physical capacity issues alone can cause overall capacity issues at center schools. I guess it would get FCPS in trouble if they said that because it means eligible students are being denied service. It’s easier to say they were ineligible for level 4 rather than say it’s related to capacity. Honestly I don’t know because this entire process is completely opaque and impossible to understand. Though I am also a firm believer that there are indeed capacity numbers that play a role. As someone earlier said, what happens after all the applications are screened and there are 4 yes or 4 no? It is impossible to think that an executive team isn’t doing something with the applications to make sure the accepted pool isn’t fully homogenous. Not just along racial lines but also along gender. Someone must be looking at that data to make sure it is being appropriately vetted and massaged.

Anonymous wrote:Okay random on the internet. I'm sure your AART would publicly disagree with her employer. Mkay sure.

There.Are.No.Capacity.Limits.

AAP teachers have special certification to teach gifted children. There may not be enough children in each grade at each school to justify training teachers at each school.

If that isn’t the pot calling the kettle black. I’m sure I’m going to go by you, Rando, who claims to be the insider who knows whether or not there are limits. Because of course you know everything there is to know about AAP and how it all works. And even though there are no limits, a ton of kids who should’ve gotten in, didn’t get in. I’m sure you’re in the know alright.

does an AART publicly refute the statements put out by her employer, you bet they do when they are good at what they do. Sorry your experience hasn’t been so.

Anonymous wrote:Okay random on the internet. I'm sure your AART would publicly disagree with her employer. Mkay sure.

There.Are.No.Capacity.Limits.

AAP teachers have special certification to teach gifted children. There may not be enough children in each grade at each school to justify training teachers at each school.

The AART teacher must disagree with the principal as well. Why would there be principal placements if there is unlimited capacity? He specifically said we can’t do in center schools because if LIMITED CAPACITY. There is only so much space! This isn’t about someone’s kid making it or not.

Okay random on the internet. I'm sure your AART would publicly disagree with her employer. Mkay sure.

There.Are.No.Capacity.Limits.

AAP teachers have special certification to teach gifted children. There may not be enough children in each grade at each school to justify training teachers at each school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would they have an ESOL teacher on the panel? If they're not using people who have training in gifted ed and who have a strong understanding of the program, how can any of it be accurate?

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but my kid barely missed the cutoff for needing ESOL, and two of his best friends who got in a couple years ago were former ESOL students who started school at Levels 2 and 3 and exited services in two years. I could see why the panel would want to get an ESOL teacher’s opinion and take something like that into consideration, especially because those particular kids are first generation.

That would make sense if the ESOL teacher was there to review files for ESOL kids. She described the process as very random, and it sounds likely that she might have a pile of non ESOL kids to review, while other teachers, who may not be qualified to appreciate ESOL progress, would be the ones reviewing those ESOL kids.

It’s just a false belief that there is no capacity limitations. The point ends right there. It doesn’t matter whether or not people want to keep spreading the false view. Our AART has told us in various meetings held on AAP that there absolutely is capacity concerns and that FCPS doesn’t clearly want to say so. It’s coming straight from the AART. (It also comes from the Principal.) So saying there are no limits doesn’t make it true. But if it helps with whatever narrative you want to keep holding, that’s fine. Both of my kids are in Level 4 at our center school so I don’t really care how much you want to keep saying the opposite. Out AART is phenomenal. The parents love her. Our Principal is great too. The parent-body fully appreciates their candidness.

This is why every ES should have a Local Level 4 and centers should be gone. There would be no capacity issues then.

Anonymous wrote:Why would they have an ESOL teacher on the panel? If they're not using people who have training in gifted ed and who have a strong understanding of the program, how can any of it be accurate?

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but my kid barely missed the cutoff for needing ESOL, and two of his best friends who got in a couple years ago were former ESOL students who started school at Levels 2 and 3 and exited services in two years. I could see why the panel would want to get an ESOL teacher’s opinion and take something like that into consideration, especially because those particular kids are first generation.

Anonymous wrote:So there is a cap because you've seen the numbers fluctuate? That doesn't make any sense at all. No. Just no.

It was a typo. I corrected immediately to say *doesn't seem to be a cap.

So there is a cap because you've seen the numbers fluctuate? That doesn't make any sense at all. No. Just no.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alright then. Continue to make up your own narrative about there being limited space to make yourself feel better. It's not true no matter how many times you repeat it

At our center there are years with 4 classes and other years with 3. It varies depending on how many kids are accepted. Does seem to be a cap as I’ve seen it go up and down

*doesn’t.

Anonymous wrote:Alright then. Continue to make up your own narrative about there being limited space to make yourself feel better. It's not true no matter how many times you repeat it

At our center there are years with 4 classes and other years with 3. It varies depending on how many kids are accepted. Does seem to be a cap as I’ve seen it go up and down

Alright then. Continue to make up your own narrative about there being limited space to make yourself feel better. It's not true no matter how many times you repeat it

Anonymous wrote:Soooo your kid didn't get in? That doesn't mean the program is at capacity. It means your kid didn't make the cut. That's okay.

Lowering the standard so that everyone is "in" ... would just be general education. We have that already. Wow are people really this salty? Your kid doesn't get in so implode the whole thing?

Or maybe this is trolling for fun? All this buildings calling out of the sky talk is so over the top

The point is, there is not unlimited capacity, because there is not unlimited space or unlimited teachers. Every year, there is a similar number of kids in the center schools because they do have limited capacity. Again, the reason for principle placements... When they are spaces remaining, students are put in. There is a limited number of students for each individual center. O

Soooo your kid didn't get in? That doesn't mean the program is at capacity. It means your kid didn't make the cut. That's okay.

Lowering the standard so that everyone is "in" ... would just be general education. We have that already. Wow are people really this salty? Your kid doesn't get in so implode the whole thing?

Or maybe this is trolling for fun? All this buildings calling out of the sky talk is so over the top