Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you find this fascinating, stick around, because IT NEVER ENDS. How many electrons go to their deaths in the service of tippety tappy posters convinced they know what's best for other people's children.

NP here. I agree that parents typically know what's best for their own children, or think they do. But public schools are designed to serve all children, not just your own. Given the limited resources FCPS has, the fact that an outsized share of those resources are going to provide a more advanced education predominantly for children from high income families is worth discussing.

Most of the "outsized share" is for testing all students, not the actual implementation of AAP. We could be like Palo Alto and scrap testing because of lack of funds, but continue with AAP.

Anonymous wrote:If you find this fascinating, stick around, because IT NEVER ENDS. How many electrons go to their deaths in the service of tippety tappy posters convinced they know what's best for other people's children.

NP here. I agree that parents typically know what's best for their own children, or think they do. But public schools are designed to serve all children, not just your own. Given the limited resources FCPS has, the fact that an outsized share of those resources are going to provide a more advanced education predominantly for children from high income families is worth discussing.

If you find this fascinating, stick around, because IT NEVER ENDS. How many electrons go to their deaths in the service of tippety tappy posters convinced they know what's best for other people's children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here it is:

The central selection committee, composed of school system professionals, looks for compelling evidence that a child’s academic needs cannot be met in a general education classroom.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/localplan/AttachmentCProceduresManualforFCPS.pdf

It's on page 42.

Ha. Logic isn't your strong suit, is it?

First, nowhere has it been proposed that kids would be in Gen Ed classrooms. All schools have advanced or gifted tracks, so you're positioning that your child is so miraculously, statistically advanced he/she does not belong in a regular school in any way shape or form, no matter the curriculum.

And bright kids everywhere else across the country might as well spend their days whittling.

The post you quote here is in reference to the post at 12:54. It is simply to explain where the phrase comes from and that it is a phrase used by FCPS. I'm not really involved in this discussion, I just happened to know the origin of that particular phrase.

I'm not sure to whom or what you are referring, unless you accidentally quoted the wrong post.

This has been a fascinating discussion to follow, and this is my first comment. I think the citation of FCPS language was used to defend centers vis a vis FCPS determining these kids "need" the centers.

I read it as FCPS saying there are kids who are beyond Gen Ed. That is not in dispute, no? We all recognize kids have different cognitive and academic levels.

Let's be honest. Kids who are in the realm of needing specialized gifted education in specialized schools are well beyond the scores and levels of most of the kids in AAP. 130 WISC or 132 Cogat are terrific scores but not in the "genius" realm. Not even close.

AAP is by name "ADVANCED ACADEMICS." To go back to the notion that yes, some kids are more advanced that others, that is categorically not the same as "gifted," and especially "gifted to the point they can't be in the same school as others."

If all AAP kids were moved back to base schools, there would be a solid core of similarly leveled kids at schools. These "advanced" kids would not be thrown into General Ed.

Not in all parts of the county. See:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/135/506982.page#7756247

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here it is:

The central selection committee, composed of school system professionals, looks for compelling evidence that a child’s academic needs cannot be met in a general education classroom.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/localplan/AttachmentCProceduresManualforFCPS.pdf

It's on page 42.

Ha. Logic isn't your strong suit, is it?

First, nowhere has it been proposed that kids would be in Gen Ed classrooms. All schools have advanced or gifted tracks, so you're positioning that your child is so miraculously, statistically advanced he/she does not belong in a regular school in any way shape or form, no matter the curriculum.

And bright kids everywhere else across the country might as well spend their days whittling.

The post you quote here is in reference to the post at 12:54. It is simply to explain where the phrase comes from and that it is a phrase used by FCPS. I'm not really involved in this discussion, I just happened to know the origin of that particular phrase.

I'm not sure to whom or what you are referring, unless you accidentally quoted the wrong post.

This has been a fascinating discussion to follow, and this is my first comment. I think the citation of FCPS language was used to defend centers vis a vis FCPS determining these kids "need" the centers.

I read it as FCPS saying there are kids who are beyond Gen Ed. That is not in dispute, no? We all recognize kids have different cognitive and academic levels.

Let's be honest. Kids who are in the realm of needing specialized gifted education in specialized schools are well beyond the scores and levels of most of the kids in AAP. 130 WISC or 132 Cogat are terrific scores but not in the "genius" realm. Not even close.

AAP is by name "ADVANCED ACADEMICS." To go back to the notion that yes, some kids are more advanced that others, that is categorically not the same as "gifted," and especially "gifted to the point they can't be in the same school as others."

If all AAP kids were moved back to base schools, there would be a solid core of similarly leveled kids at schools. These "advanced" kids would not be thrown into General Ed.

Anonymous wrote:Of course removing top-performing kids from base schools will change the base schools. But it's ludicrous for parents not to recognize those schools would also change if AAP kids moved back.

Really? So if my 5th grade DD moved back to her base school, it will change the base school?

Yes, I suppose it would change the base school by adding one student to the 5th grade classes. So instead of 101 students, there would 102. She would join her four former classmates who chose to stay at the base school for Local Level IV.

I do not consider this a positive change for my child as she would lose her peer group of 66 students at the AAP Center school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here it is:

The central selection committee, composed of school system professionals, looks for compelling evidence that a child’s academic needs cannot be met in a general education classroom.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/localplan/AttachmentCProceduresManualforFCPS.pdf

It's on page 42.

Ha. Logic isn't your strong suit, is it?

First, nowhere has it been proposed that kids would be in Gen Ed classrooms. All schools have advanced or gifted tracks, so you're positioning that your child is so miraculously, statistically advanced he/she does not belong in a regular school in any way shape or form, no matter the curriculum.

And bright kids everywhere else across the country might as well spend their days whittling.

The post you quote here is in reference to the post at 12:54. It is simply to explain where the phrase comes from and that it is a phrase used by FCPS. I'm not really involved in this discussion, I just happened to know the origin of that particular phrase.

I'm not sure to whom or what you are referring, unless you accidentally quoted the wrong post.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other than Montgomery County which spends considerably more per child than FCPS and doesn't teach advanced math in general ed, what other school systems are teaching advanced instruction better than FCPS?

What do you mean Montgomery County doesn't teach advanced math in General Ed? Any student has the option of starting advanced math at the Compacted 4/5 level without regard to entry into HGC (highly gifted center).

How is this better than Fairfax? FCPS allows for all children to access basic grade level standards 1 grade above starting in kindergarten. They also teach basic and extended math standards for the grade above starting in 3rd for AAP. The general ed program is already at the level of MCPS, but starts 4 years earlier.

They do? I didn't know that.

Yes. It's right here. If a particular school doesn't because of staffing or a principal decision, parents can contact their school board rep. Typically K doesn't offer much advanced math instruction from the teacher (usually it's an advanced math computer game or something), but I haven't heard of any issues from 1st grade on with advanced math instruction. http://www.fcps.edu/is/math/elementary/

Anonymous wrote:Here it is:

The central selection committee, composed of school system professionals, looks for compelling evidence that a child’s academic needs cannot be met in a general education classroom.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/localplan/AttachmentCProceduresManualforFCPS.pdf

It's on page 42.

Ha. Logic isn't your strong suit, is it?

First, nowhere has it been proposed that kids would be in Gen Ed classrooms. All schools have advanced or gifted tracks, so you're positioning that your child is so miraculously, statistically advanced he/she does not belong in a regular school in any way shape or form, no matter the curriculum.

And bright kids everywhere else across the country might as well spend their days whittling.

Here it is:

The central selection committee, composed of school system professionals, looks for compelling evidence that a child’s academic needs cannot be met in a general education classroom.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/localplan/AttachmentCProceduresManualforFCPS.pdf

It's on page 42.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other than Montgomery County which spends considerably more per child than FCPS and doesn't teach advanced math in general ed, what other school systems are teaching advanced instruction better than FCPS?

What do you mean Montgomery County doesn't teach advanced math in General Ed? Any student has the option of starting advanced math at the Compacted 4/5 level without regard to entry into HGC (highly gifted center).

How is this better than Fairfax? FCPS allows for all children to access basic grade level standards 1 grade above starting in kindergarten. They also teach basic and extended math standards for the grade above starting in 3rd for AAP. The general ed program is already at the level of MCPS, but starts 4 years earlier.

They do? I didn't know that.

This entire artificial construct that "gifted" children's needs couldn't be met in a non-AAP classroom is ridiculous.

Tell FCPS that. Maybe they've stopped, but they used to send out a letter that said, "The program is for children whose needs cannot be met in the regular classroom."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other than Montgomery County which spends considerably more per child than FCPS and doesn't teach advanced math in general ed, what other school systems are teaching advanced instruction better than FCPS?

What do you mean Montgomery County doesn't teach advanced math in General Ed? Any student has the option of starting advanced math at the Compacted 4/5 level without regard to entry into HGC (highly gifted center).

How is this better than Fairfax? FCPS allows for all children to access basic grade level standards 1 grade above starting in kindergarten. They also teach basic and extended math standards for the grade above starting in 3rd for AAP. The general ed program is already at the level of MCPS, but starts 4 years earlier.

I don't think people think that, but either way, this group of super gifted children is not what this thread is about. The focus is on the kids who are in the gifted program, but don't need to be there. Not how gifted is FCPS's gifted program. Start another thread for that if you want.

Is that what the thread is about? Nine pages in and I don't think the OP's post has been fully explored or addressed. However, the utter lack of self-awareness on display is entertaining, even if I do pity the children of many of the posters.

I have a child in AAP. And before anyone starts with the "you didn't have to enroll her if you think base schools are fine" our center is in our base school.

This entire artificial construct that "gifted" children's needs couldn't be met in a non-AAP classroom is ridiculous. If AAP didn't exist, I guarantee schools would adjust as need to be accommodate the more advanced learners. Thousands of really terrific school districts across the country do just that. It's a fact.

Of course removing top-performing kids from base schools will change the base schools. But it's ludicrous for parents not to recognize those schools would also change if AAP kids moved back.

The people who defend AAP are trying to protect their ability to overtly show their child is "gifted."