Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.
You are contradicting yourself. Should a student who is in the top tier of his school be denied acceptance for a gifted program at his school, because there are lots of students scoring higher than him at other schools in the county or the country?
New poster: if the curriculum is the same that was provided to most kids hitting benchmark scores but now some of those kids are denied entry merely because others scored higher, I don’t think that’s right. I know it’s a “wholistic” process to determine who is admitted, but if a kid gets a 134 on the cogat and is now denied entry when:
- the curriculum is the same as it was before this new “in pool” benchmark score
- other kids in the county with lower scores are admitted simply because they are the best at that school, but not necessarily the best in FCPS
It appears unfair. If you’re instead offering an even more advanced curriculum because now scores are higher for being “in pool,” that’s different.
They’re also denying accelerated math to kids who need it. That’s a problem w this new process.
It is difficult for me to roll my eyes harder at this post.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.
You are contradicting yourself. Should a student who is in the top tier of his school be denied acceptance for a gifted program at his school, because there are lots of students scoring higher than him at other schools in the county or the country?
New poster: if the curriculum is the same that was provided to most kids hitting benchmark scores but now some of those kids are denied entry merely because others scored higher, I don’t think that’s right. I know it’s a “wholistic” process to determine who is admitted, but if a kid gets a 134 on the cogat and is now denied entry when:
- the curriculum is the same as it was before this new “in pool” benchmark score
- other kids in the county with lower scores are admitted simply because they are the best at that school, but not necessarily the best in FCPS
It appears unfair. If you’re instead offering an even more advanced curriculum because now scores are higher for being “in pool,” that’s different.
They’re also denying accelerated math to kids who need it. That’s a problem w this new process.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.
You are contradicting yourself. Should a student who is in the top tier of his school be denied acceptance for a gifted program at his school, because there are lots of students scoring higher than him at other schools in the county or the country?
New poster: if the curriculum is the same that was provided to most kids hitting benchmark scores but now some of those kids are denied entry merely because others scored higher, I don’t think that’s right. I know it’s a “wholistic” process to determine who is admitted, but if a kid gets a 134 on the cogat and is now denied entry when:
- the curriculum is the same as it was before this new “in pool” benchmark score
- other kids in the county with lower scores are admitted simply because they are the best at that school, but not necessarily the best in FCPS
It appears unfair. If you’re instead offering an even more advanced curriculum because now scores are higher for being “in pool,” that’s different.
They’re also denying accelerated math to kids who need it. That’s a problem w this new process.
Says who? Is this some sort of policy? There are tons of kids in our school who are Level III and get accelerated (i.e. Level IV) math.
Really? Do tell how often they are receiving accelerated math! At our Vienna elem school, level 3 pull outs are once a week only and:
- it’s a different core class each quarter - meaning one quarter of accelerated math before the next core subject begins
- any school holiday weeks (even one day), typically means the kids miss their one day a week of one hour of level 3 instruction. Same during the weeks the local committee meets and discusses the applications.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.
You are contradicting yourself. Should a student who is in the top tier of his school be denied acceptance for a gifted program at his school, because there are lots of students scoring higher than him at other schools in the county or the country?
New poster: if the curriculum is the same that was provided to most kids hitting benchmark scores but now some of those kids are denied entry merely because others scored higher, I don’t think that’s right. I know it’s a “wholistic” process to determine who is admitted, but if a kid gets a 134 on the cogat and is now denied entry when:
- the curriculum is the same as it was before this new “in pool” benchmark score
- other kids in the county with lower scores are admitted simply because they are the best at that school, but not necessarily the best in FCPS
It appears unfair. If you’re instead offering an even more advanced curriculum because now scores are higher for being “in pool,” that’s different.
They’re also denying accelerated math to kids who need it. That’s a problem w this new process.
Says who? Is this some sort of policy? There are tons of kids in our school who are Level III and get accelerated (i.e. Level IV) math.
Really? Do tell how often they are receiving accelerated math! At our Vienna elem school, level 3 pull outs are once a week only and:
- it’s a different core class each quarter - meaning one quarter of accelerated math before the next core subject begins
- any school holiday weeks (even one day), typically means the kids miss their one day a week of one hour of level 3 instruction. Same during the weeks the local committee meets and discusses the applications.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.
You are contradicting yourself. Should a student who is in the top tier of his school be denied acceptance for a gifted program at his school, because there are lots of students scoring higher than him at other schools in the county or the country?
New poster: if the curriculum is the same that was provided to most kids hitting benchmark scores but now some of those kids are denied entry merely because others scored higher, I don’t think that’s right. I know it’s a “wholistic” process to determine who is admitted, but if a kid gets a 134 on the cogat and is now denied entry when:
- the curriculum is the same as it was before this new “in pool” benchmark score
- other kids in the county with lower scores are admitted simply because they are the best at that school, but not necessarily the best in FCPS
It appears unfair. If you’re instead offering an even more advanced curriculum because now scores are higher for being “in pool,” that’s different.
They’re also denying accelerated math to kids who need it. That’s a problem w this new process.
Says who? Is this some sort of policy? There are tons of kids in our school who are Level III and get accelerated (i.e. Level IV) math.
Really? Do tell how often they are receiving accelerated math! At our Vienna elem school, level 3 pull outs are once a week only and:
- it’s a different core class each quarter - meaning one quarter of accelerated math before the next core subject begins
- any school holiday weeks (even one day), typically means the kids miss their one day a week of one hour of level 3 instruction. Same during the weeks the local committee meets and discusses the applications.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.
You are contradicting yourself. Should a student who is in the top tier of his school be denied acceptance for a gifted program at his school, because there are lots of students scoring higher than him at other schools in the county or the country?
New poster: if the curriculum is the same that was provided to most kids hitting benchmark scores but now some of those kids are denied entry merely because others scored higher, I don’t think that’s right. I know it’s a “wholistic” process to determine who is admitted, but if a kid gets a 134 on the cogat and is now denied entry when:
- the curriculum is the same as it was before this new “in pool” benchmark score
- other kids in the county with lower scores are admitted simply because they are the best at that school, but not necessarily the best in FCPS
It appears unfair. If you’re instead offering an even more advanced curriculum because now scores are higher for being “in pool,” that’s different.
They’re also denying accelerated math to kids who need it. That’s a problem w this new process.
Says who? Is this some sort of policy? There are tons of kids in our school who are Level III and get accelerated (i.e. Level IV) math.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.
You are contradicting yourself. Should a student who is in the top tier of his school be denied acceptance for a gifted program at his school, because there are lots of students scoring higher than him at other schools in the county or the country?
New poster: if the curriculum is the same that was provided to most kids hitting benchmark scores but now some of those kids are denied entry merely because others scored higher, I don’t think that’s right. I know it’s a “wholistic” process to determine who is admitted, but if a kid gets a 134 on the cogat and is now denied entry when:
- the curriculum is the same as it was before this new “in pool” benchmark score
- other kids in the county with lower scores are admitted simply because they are the best at that school, but not necessarily the best in FCPS
It appears unfair. If you’re instead offering an even more advanced curriculum because now scores are higher for being “in pool,” that’s different.
They’re also denying accelerated math to kids who need it. That’s a problem w this new process.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.
You are contradicting yourself. Should a student who is in the top tier of his school be denied acceptance for a gifted program at his school, because there are lots of students scoring higher than him at other schools in the county or the country?
New poster: if the curriculum is the same that was provided to most kids hitting benchmark scores but now some of those kids are denied entry merely because others scored higher, I don’t think that’s right. I know it’s a “wholistic” process to determine who is admitted, but if a kid gets a 134 on the cogat and is now denied entry when:
- the curriculum is the same as it was before this new “in pool” benchmark score
- other kids in the county with lower scores are admitted simply because they are the best at that school, but not necessarily the best in FCPS
It appears unfair. If you’re instead offering an even more advanced curriculum because now scores are higher for being “in pool,” that’s different.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.
You are contradicting yourself. Should a student who is in the top tier of his school be denied acceptance for a gifted program at his school, because there are lots of students scoring higher than him at other schools in the county or the country?
New poster: if the curriculum is the same that was provided to most kids hitting benchmark scores but now some of those kids are denied entry merely because others scored higher, I don’t think that’s right. I know it’s a “wholistic” process to determine who is admitted, but if a kid gets a 134 on the cogat and is now denied entry when:
- the curriculum is the same as it was before this new “in pool” benchmark score
- other kids in the county with lower scores are admitted simply because they are the best at that school, but not necessarily the best in FCPS
It appears unfair. If you’re instead offering an even more advanced curriculum because now scores are higher for being “in pool,” that’s different.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.
You are contradicting yourself. Should a student who is in the top tier of his school be denied acceptance for a gifted program at his school, because there are lots of students scoring higher than him at other schools in the county or the country?
Anonymous wrote:When half the kids in a class score 120+ (as is often the case in high-SES schools) a kid with a 135 can still be well-served in a gen ed classroom. Classes will be taught at a higher level. Many of these schools are now using the AAP curriculum for all students anyway.
In lower-SES schools, you're more likely to have a small handful scoring in the 120s or 130s, along with significant numbers in the nineties. The top scores may not be as high, but there is actually a greater need for differentiation.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mark my words, FCPS will ultimately do away with the center model. They’re moving to local level IV in every elementary, that will serve the top 10% in each school.
Under the old model, almost no one from Title One schools was in-pool, which meant that smart kids with less involved parents and less enriching environments were falling through the cracks.
We used to live in a high farms neighborhood and the school didn’t have enough kids to have an AAP class. The center school pulled from like 10 elementary and the AAP center was strong.
Dragging people down from the top won’t necessarily help the people at the bottom.
What’s your research to support this? Or is this just you opining on a Saturday morning?
I don’t think it is fair to have a high cut off in a school like McLean or Oakton and let lesser kids in in Annandale or Alexandria. While it is fine to offer more spots to kids who normally would not be in pool in high FARMs school, I don’t think it is right to cut a kid in McLean with higher scores.