Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In our LLIV for my DC's class, all the kids are center eligible. There was 1 child who wasn't but that DC became center eligible the next year. However, there are a lot of LLIV eligible in our school and the majority of kids stay at the base school.

I don't believe that all kids in local IV class are center eligible , even a majority of it. May be people mixed up with Local IV and level III. Think about the statistic, one full class typically equals to 20-25% of the grade, do you really think that many 2nd grade students were accepted to AAP ( 20% local plus average 15% center = 35%) ?
Starting 3rd grade, school will place kids in different math classes, those who are in "accelerated" class will study one level above grade of Math all the way to 6th grade ( 3rd grade take 4th grade math level, even with SOL math test, and so on). This " accelerated" class comprises of Local IV, level III and principal placement.

Someone has mentioned that there is no need to stress the kids at ES, absolutely agree. But if you don't put your child in appropriate curriculum right the start, you might have to find the way for the kids to accelerate in MS and HS, especially in Math. Why? the AP and IB classes for Math in High School require an order sequence of Math class, starting at early stage ( I.e Math 7 in 6th grade, Math 8 in 7th grade, Algebra Honor in 8th grade, Geometry Honor in 9th grade, etc). So if your child does not have local III , or IV placement in ES and follow the regular sequence, he/ she will have to jump ahead in MS and HS in order to compete with other kids. Remember FCPS is very competitive , especially for getting into good colleges.

This is wrong. My non-AAP child was in Honors Algebra by 7th, Honors Geometry 8th and Honors Algebra II Trig by 9th. He is still ahead of most of his peers. He might have had LLIII in grade school, but had stopped attending by 6th grade because he and his friends hated it. Somehow he's survived and thrived even in "competitive" FCPS. Chill, please.

+1000
The hype over being in AAP (or not) is so overblown.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In our LLIV for my DC's class, all the kids are center eligible. There was 1 child who wasn't but that DC became center eligible the next year. However, there are a lot of LLIV eligible in our school and the majority of kids stay at the base school.

I don't believe that all kids in local IV class are center eligible , even a majority of it. May be people mixed up with Local IV and level III. Think about the statistic, one full class typically equals to 20-25% of the grade, do you really think that many 2nd grade students were accepted to AAP ( 20% local plus average 15% center = 35%) ?
Starting 3rd grade, school will place kids in different math classes, those who are in "accelerated" class will study one level above grade of Math all the way to 6th grade ( 3rd grade take 4th grade math level, even with SOL math test, and so on). This " accelerated" class comprises of Local IV, level III and principal placement.

Someone has mentioned that there is no need to stress the kids at ES, absolutely agree. But if you don't put your child in appropriate curriculum right the start, you might have to find the way for the kids to accelerate in MS and HS, especially in Math. Why? the AP and IB classes for Math in High School require an order sequence of Math class, starting at early stage ( I.e Math 7 in 6th grade, Math 8 in 7th grade, Algebra Honor in 8th grade, Geometry Honor in 9th grade, etc). So if your child does not have local III , or IV placement in ES and follow the regular sequence, he/ she will have to jump ahead in MS and HS in order to compete with other kids. Remember FCPS is very competitive , especially for getting into good colleges.

This is wrong. My non-AAP child was in Honors Algebra by 7th, Honors Geometry 8th and Honors Algebra II Trig by 9th. He is still ahead of most of his peers. He might have had LLIII in grade school, but had stopped attending by 6th grade because he and his friends hated it. Somehow he's survived and thrived even in "competitive" FCPS. Chill, please.

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that local level IV classes are filled with students who either A) were center-eligible but chose not to go, or B) selected somehow by the school. Can anyone elaborate more on that selection process? And given my "no" letter, would it be helpful for me to get the WISC and appeal to get her into center AAP just to decline it later?

Our specific situation:
2nd grader at a McLean-area ES with Local Level IV
"No" letter from FCPS tpday
COGATs in the 90th percentile or so for Math and Verbal but 75% on Non-Verbal
(sorry don't have exact scores)
Don't have GBRS yet either.

She has a very good memory and the level of repetition / review in the classroom is already turning her off to school. Also her reading level this year went from about average to way above so I think the Verbal is way behind at this point. Thus my goal is to get her into local level IV (but NOT the center, we like our local school), or at least level III. Thanks and hopefully this info will be useful to others too.

Make that your goal IF and only if it's the right place for your child.
AAP has been such a "prize" that parents sometimes will aspire for it because they think that it's "better." It's only better if it fits your child.
So how are you going to know if it fits your child? Now that you're child has been found ineligible, you should get to know your child. Get more testing done, understand her strengths, understand her personality and what motivates her. Right now, you just don't have enough hard data to support your observations. Your observations of your child are pretty common. Get your child involved in other academic settings outside of school so that you have other teachers who can give you observations without having to be tied to the canned answers that FCPS teachers give. Your child's NNAT and CogAT are below cut off and I am suspecting that her GBRS isn't high because she was found ineligible. If it's not a high score, the commentaries on the GBRS are probably not going to be that useful for you. So, go outside the school and get your data elsewhere.

Once you get your data, be honest with yourself and your goals, versus what's going to be the best place for your child. And also remember that it's a long haul.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At our McLean elementary school, all AAP kids are placed in the Level IV class. To fill the remaining seats, every student in the grade takes a placement ecart test each quarter and the students that score the highest for each subject fill in the rest of the seats for the class. Students move in or out of the class every quarter based on these tests, so it's great for a Gen Ed kid who is really good in 1 or 2 subjects, but not all 4. Also, if someone improves during the year, they also have a good chance to move into the Level IV class since there is movement 3 times a year (not counting first time placement at the beginning of each year). It's a great system I think.

That has to be the worst, most developmentally inappropriate system I've ever heard of.

Why do people allow their kids to be treated the way that FCPS treats kids?

It actually works very well and is one of the more developmentaly appropriate systems for alll the children. Student A does not qualify for AAP but is superioir in science and math. Student A takes the AAP curriculum in science and math and the gen-ed in social studies and langauge arts. Student B is superior in language arts but struggles in science and math and has a nack for history. Student B take AAP in langauge arts and social studies and gen-ed in math and science. Student C qualifies for AAP and take the AAP curriculum in all four core courses. Student C is in special ed for language arts but is superior in math and science. Student C takes AAP for math and science, special ed for langague arts and gen-ed for social studies. ..........

At the ES school where DC attended, the classes were set for the year (although one or two student may move up/down as needed)- except in 2nd-4th grade math. In math fort those years students took a pre-test for each unit and were place in the appropriate math class for that unit. By 5th grade the math classes were bascially set for the year.

This would be a fine system.....if all ES's could implement it. Ours does not because the principal does not believe in differentiated learning. For example, my child has qualified for Level II math and SS in 3rd and 4th grade and it's all up to the teacher's discretion. The teacher does NOT teach the Level IV AAP curriculum in those subjects.

And the Level IV system definitely lets some children fall through the cracks. My child did not test well at all on the NNAT or the COGAT due to different circumstances, and so was passed over at the end of 2nd grade for AAP. Yet in 3rd grade, DC received EXTREMELY high GBRS from the teacher at the end of the year, had high grades, and scored Pass/Advanced on the SOLs. This year, 4th grade teacher encouraged us to parent-refer for Level IV b/c DC was getting Level II in all subjects, and teacher indicated the likelihood of a high GBRS. We did not get additional testing, just did the parent referral form, and DC was now found eligible for Level IV. Clearly would have been eligible to start Level IV AAP at the beginning of 3rd grade like others had it not been for a flawed system.

I agree that it's probably a flawed system, but no system is perfect. Just because your DC did poorly on the tests but got in the next year does not mean it's flawed from that perspective. If DC was really eligible the previous year, you could have appealed with a WISC score. You're right - everybody has a bad testing day, but since you didn't provide any other testing, how were they supposed to decide DC was eligible? There is also a lot more entry after 3rd grade into AAP without testing based on teacher recommendations. This is no way means they are gifted, just that they can do the higher level work as it stands at the moment. This is how the system has been changed and because of that, there is more reason to get rid of the centers and just keep local level IV for both gifted and highly motivated students. The center concept should be limited to the highly gifted - 140 or above, and I freely admit my DC is not one of those.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At our McLean elementary school, all AAP kids are placed in the Level IV class. To fill the remaining seats, every student in the grade takes a placement ecart test each quarter and the students that score the highest for each subject fill in the rest of the seats for the class. Students move in or out of the class every quarter based on these tests, so it's great for a Gen Ed kid who is really good in 1 or 2 subjects, but not all 4. Also, if someone improves during the year, they also have a good chance to move into the Level IV class since there is movement 3 times a year (not counting first time placement at the beginning of each year). It's a great system I think.

That has to be the worst, most developmentally inappropriate system I've ever heard of.

Why do people allow their kids to be treated the way that FCPS treats kids?

It actually works very well and is one of the more developmentaly appropriate systems for alll the children. Student A does not qualify for AAP but is superioir in science and math. Student A takes the AAP curriculum in science and math and the gen-ed in social studies and langauge arts. Student B is superior in language arts but struggles in science and math and has a nack for history. Student B take AAP in langauge arts and social studies and gen-ed in math and science. Student C qualifies for AAP and take the AAP curriculum in all four core courses. Student C is in special ed for language arts but is superior in math and science. Student C takes AAP for math and science, special ed for langague arts and gen-ed for social studies. ..........

At the ES school where DC attended, the classes were set for the year (although one or two student may move up/down as needed)- except in 2nd-4th grade math. In math fort those years students took a pre-test for each unit and were place in the appropriate math class for that unit. By 5th grade the math classes were bascially set for the year.

This would be a fine system.....if all ES's could implement it. Ours does not because the principal does not believe in differentiated learning. For example, my child has qualified for Level II math and SS in 3rd and 4th grade and it's all up to the teacher's discretion. The teacher does NOT teach the Level IV AAP curriculum in those subjects.

And the Level IV system definitely lets some children fall through the cracks. My child did not test well at all on the NNAT or the COGAT due to different circumstances, and so was passed over at the end of 2nd grade for AAP. Yet in 3rd grade, DC received EXTREMELY high GBRS from the teacher at the end of the year, had high grades, and scored Pass/Advanced on the SOLs. This year, 4th grade teacher encouraged us to parent-refer for Level IV b/c DC was getting Level II in all subjects, and teacher indicated the likelihood of a high GBRS. We did not get additional testing, just did the parent referral form, and DC was now found eligible for Level IV. Clearly would have been eligible to start Level IV AAP at the beginning of 3rd grade like others had it not been for a flawed system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At our McLean elementary school, all AAP kids are placed in the Level IV class. To fill the remaining seats, every student in the grade takes a placement ecart test each quarter and the students that score the highest for each subject fill in the rest of the seats for the class. Students move in or out of the class every quarter based on these tests, so it's great for a Gen Ed kid who is really good in 1 or 2 subjects, but not all 4. Also, if someone improves during the year, they also have a good chance to move into the Level IV class since there is movement 3 times a year (not counting first time placement at the beginning of each year). It's a great system I think.

That has to be the worst, most developmentally inappropriate system I've ever heard of.

Why do people allow their kids to be treated the way that FCPS treats kids?

It's called differenciation or flexible grouping. I don't know why you think it's a bad idea. It gives students a chance to receive advanced instruction in areas of their strengths while still receiving on-grade-level instruction in areas where they aren't ready for acceleration.

Anonymous wrote:Have you discussed with her teacher and get his/her opinion? You might want to do that before heading down the path of appeal and pay for the extra testing.

It's just that your description of your DC applies to just about every other kids (good memory, bored with repetition etc etc). But tested in the 90th % is pretty far off from the 98%..... You will need a strong advocate if you want to appeal besides yourself. So talk to her teacher and see what kind of feedback you get.

I have two kids in AAP. I've seen their friends "struggle" through assignments and tests. There is still MS and HS to come! Way too early to stress the kid out at ES.

Yes, you should get the teacher's opinion after looking at your DC's GBRS commentary and scoring- don't ask them if DC should be in AAP, ask them if DC is capable of doing the work. I disagree w/ PP as our DC scored about 90% on Cogat and much higher on the WISC (98% scores) . I don't believe teacher can act as an proxy advocate on your behalf (i.e. no FCPS employee can be engaged outside of GBRS process which has already been done) but clearly their guidance would support your decision to appeal. WISC test will help no doubt

Anonymous wrote:The scores need to be in the top 2%. That is the 98% or higher or super high GBRS and Scores that are around the 98%. At the 90% and 75% you would not want your child in level 4 unless it was strongly recommended by the School. They basically skip 3rd grade math... If you have the $ get the WISC "They say" it still needs to be 132+ (still top 2 %). You should talk to your school about level 2 or 3. Schools may fill local level 4 with level 3 students simply to fill seats.

The pool STARTS w/ the top 2% and is widened with parent referrals, then appeals. OP's kid appears bright - don' t let the 90%,75% scores tell you differently - ask DC's teacher if they are capable of AAP math. From our DC's experience, 3rd grade math isn't skipped, they review 2nd grade, do 3rd grade and half of 4th grade math. WISC scores are more heavily weighted that Cogat (IMHO), they don't have to be 132+ - ours and other posters have found their kids scored much more strongly on WISC.

Anonymous wrote:In our LLIV for my DC's class, all the kids are center eligible. There was 1 child who wasn't but that DC became center eligible the next year. However, there are a lot of LLIV eligible in our school and the majority of kids stay at the base school.

I don't believe that all kids in local IV class are center eligible , even a majority of it. May be people mixed up with Local IV and level III. Think about the statistic, one full class typically equals to 20-25% of the grade, do you really think that many 2nd grade students were accepted to AAP ( 20% local plus average 15% center = 35%) ?
Starting 3rd grade, school will place kids in different math classes, those who are in "accelerated" class will study one level above grade of Math all the way to 6th grade ( 3rd grade take 4th grade math level, even with SOL math test, and so on). This " accelerated" class comprises of Local IV, level III and principal placement.

Someone has mentioned that there is no need to stress the kids at ES, absolutely agree. But if you don't put your child in appropriate curriculum right the start, you might have to find the way for the kids to accelerate in MS and HS, especially in Math. Why? the AP and IB classes for Math in High School require an order sequence of Math class, starting at early stage ( I.e Math 7 in 6th grade, Math 8 in 7th grade, Algebra Honor in 8th grade, Geometry Honor in 9th grade, etc). So if your child does not have local III , or IV placement in ES and follow the regular sequence, he/ she will have to jump ahead in MS and HS in order to compete with other kids. Remember FCPS is very competitive , especially for getting into good colleges.

In our LLIV for my DC's class, all the kids are center eligible. There was 1 child who wasn't but that DC became center eligible the next year. However, there are a lot of LLIV eligible in our school and the majority of kids stay at the base school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At our McLean elementary school, all AAP kids are placed in the Level IV class. To fill the remaining seats, every student in the grade takes a placement ecart test each quarter and the students that score the highest for each subject fill in the rest of the seats for the class. Students move in or out of the class every quarter based on these tests, so it's great for a Gen Ed kid who is really good in 1 or 2 subjects, but not all 4. Also, if someone improves during the year, they also have a good chance to move into the Level IV class since there is movement 3 times a year (not counting first time placement at the beginning of each year). It's a great system I think.

That has to be the worst, most developmentally inappropriate system I've ever heard of.

Why do people allow their kids to be treated the way that FCPS treats kids?

It actually works very well and is one of the more developmentaly appropriate systems for alll the children. Student A does not qualify for AAP but is superioir in science and math. Student A takes the AAP curriculum in science and math and the gen-ed in social studies and langauge arts. Student B is superior in language arts but struggles in science and math and has a nack for history. Student B take AAP in langauge arts and social studies and gen-ed in math and science. Student C qualifies for AAP and take the AAP curriculum in all four core courses. Student C is in special ed for language arts but is superior in math and science. Student C takes AAP for math and science, special ed for langague arts and gen-ed for social studies. ..........

At the ES school where DC attended, the classes were set for the year (although one or two student may move up/down as needed)- except in 2nd-4th grade math. In math fort those years students took a pre-test for each unit and were place in the appropriate math class for that unit. By 5th grade the math classes were bascially set for the year.

Have you discussed with her teacher and get his/her opinion? You might want to do that before heading down the path of appeal and pay for the extra testing.

It's just that your description of your DC applies to just about every other kids (good memory, bored with repetition etc etc). But tested in the 90th % is pretty far off from the 98%..... You will need a strong advocate if you want to appeal besides yourself. So talk to her teacher and see what kind of feedback you get.

I have two kids in AAP. I've seen their friends "struggle" through assignments and tests. There is still MS and HS to come! Way too early to stress the kid out at ES.

Thanks for the quick responses - very helpful. I didn't think it through that even if a child got into local level IV through school/principal selection that it would be quite easy to take them out again later for whatever reason. That's a good argument for taking the WISC ASAP and appealing - assuming she can get scores that are consistent with her great school performance right now. Do any DCUMers have suggestions for testing places besides GMU that might not have such a long wait?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At our McLean elementary school, all AAP kids are placed in the Level IV class. To fill the remaining seats, every student in the grade takes a placement ecart test each quarter and the students that score the highest for each subject fill in the rest of the seats for the class. Students move in or out of the class every quarter based on these tests, so it's great for a Gen Ed kid who is really good in 1 or 2 subjects, but not all 4. Also, if someone improves during the year, they also have a good chance to move into the Level IV class since there is movement 3 times a year (not counting first time placement at the beginning of each year). It's a great system I think.

That has to be the worst, most developmentally inappropriate system I've ever heard of.

Why do people allow their kids to be treated the way that FCPS treats kids?

I'm not sure why you think it's inappropriate. It's a pretty fair system without parent referral pushing or principal favoritism. There are several levels of each subject in a grade, so they are able to differentiate better with the kids. If you really know a subject they are about to cover, you move into a more in depth classroom for that quarter. If you don't know the subject well, you're in a classroom to learn the basics with other similarly situated kids. No one, including the kids, thinks anything of moving classrooms as they switch for each subject anyway. Isn't the point to give the students the best situation to learn at their pace?

Not the PP, but wouldn't this be the best system in general? Forget "AAP" and just cycle the kids to and from whichever class level they are best suited for, with plenty of re-evaluation and testing. No need to label one group this and another group that.

Anonymous wrote:At our LLIV program school, there are students who elected not to leave to go to the center, and there are also (quite a few) students who are "principal placed" based on prior year teachers recommendations. The principal goes to the teachers and asks for recommendations and then decides who he/she thinks is a good fit. These are students who just missed being in the pool, or students whom their prior year teacher feels would thrive in the program.

They stay in the class for the entire year, but are never guaranteed a spot from year to year. Many of those students are parent referred as a result. Many get in Level IV, some don't.

This whole system is so arbitrary - why doesn't FCPS just open up the whole program and do away with this ridiculous "system"? There is no consistency whatsoever, a completely subjective application process, appeals, and then principal placements. SO much time, energy, and money could be saved by simply making AAP the regular curriculum and moving on. What teacher can even keep track of who is Level IV, III, II, or whatever? It's so, so ridiculous.