- Allowing for 5 times that because, you know its Fairfax (Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
I think the only way to do this for 2016-17 would be to close AAP Centers altogether and eliminate Level II and Level III as well.
So, then what happens to the kids that are truly gifted? If they're considering closing AAP centers down or eliminating the program, they need to have contingencies in place for the kids in the top 1-3percentile. Would they go to IEP plans or whatever they are called?
Nationally or in Fairfax? If it is nationally,then that is 10% or more of the Fairfax student body. They used to set the cut off at the 10% mark for Fairfax and it was usually at the 2% mark nationally. Fairfax is lucky, they have a large enough gifted population (in many school) to not have to segregate the students in separate schools. Now, if you are talking above kids above 150 - then that would be a much smaller number- probably worth 1 or 2 centers for the whole county.
Kids above 150.
So one center should do it.
Above 150 is a z-score of 3.125. That's more like 0.2% of the population.
- that would be 130 per grade- and excellent size for one dedicated school.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
I think the only way to do this for 2016-17 would be to close AAP Centers altogether and eliminate Level II and Level III as well.
So, then what happens to the kids that are truly gifted? If they're considering closing AAP centers down or eliminating the program, they need to have contingencies in place for the kids in the top 1-3percentile. Would they go to IEP plans or whatever they are called?
Nationally or in Fairfax? If it is nationally,then that is 10% or more of the Fairfax student body. They used to set the cut off at the 10% mark for Fairfax and it was usually at the 2% mark nationally. Fairfax is lucky, they have a large enough gifted population (in many school) to not have to segregate the students in separate schools. Now, if you are talking above kids above 150 - then that would be a much smaller number- probably worth 1 or 2 centers for the whole county.
Kids above 150.
So one center should do it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
I think the only way to do this for 2016-17 would be to close AAP Centers altogether and eliminate Level II and Level III as well.
So, then what happens to the kids that are truly gifted? If they're considering closing AAP centers down or eliminating the program, they need to have contingencies in place for the kids in the top 1-3percentile. Would they go to IEP plans or whatever they are called?
Nationally or in Fairfax? If it is nationally,then that is 10% or more of the Fairfax student body. They used to set the cut off at the 10% mark for Fairfax and it was usually at the 2% mark nationally. Fairfax is lucky, they have a large enough gifted population (in many school) to not have to segregate the students in separate schools. Now, if you are talking above kids above 150 - then that would be a much smaller number- probably worth 1 or 2 centers for the whole county.
Kids above 150.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
I think the only way to do this for 2016-17 would be to close AAP Centers altogether and eliminate Level II and Level III as well.
So, then what happens to the kids that are truly gifted? If they're considering closing AAP centers down or eliminating the program, they need to have contingencies in place for the kids in the top 1-3percentile. Would they go to IEP plans or whatever they are called?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
I think the only way to do this for 2016-17 would be to close AAP Centers altogether and eliminate Level II and Level III as well.
So, then what happens to the kids that are truly gifted? If they're considering closing AAP centers down or eliminating the program, they need to have contingencies in place for the kids in the top 1-3percentile. Would they go to IEP plans or whatever they are called?
I do not think the Budget Task Force has thought any of that through.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
I think the only way to do this for 2016-17 would be to close AAP Centers altogether and eliminate Level II and Level III as well.
So, then what happens to the kids that are truly gifted? If they're considering closing AAP centers down or eliminating the program, they need to have contingencies in place for the kids in the top 1-3percentile. Would they go to IEP plans or whatever they are called?
Nationally or in Fairfax? If it is nationally,then that is 10% or more of the Fairfax student body. They used to set the cut off at the 10% mark for Fairfax and it was usually at the 2% mark nationally. Fairfax is lucky, they have a large enough gifted population (in many school) to not have to segregate the students in separate schools. Now, if you are talking above kids above 150 - then that would be a much smaller number- probably worth 1 or 2 centers for the whole county.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I doubt they will get rid of centers. My DC's base school had 3 third graders who went to the center this year. I'm not sure how many were actually eligible, but that's how many went. DC's base school doesn't have local level IV because the number of AAP eligible kids is usually very low. For schools like that, it makes sense to have a center model, so I doubt they'll eliminate centers for them. The parents in areas with local level IV and enough kids to field two classes are vocal and love to brag about their kids going to a center, so will fight eliminating those centers. FCPS also thinks the center model makes their schools look more desirable/elite, so there is no incentive to eliminate on that end either. Bottom line, I would be shocked (and pleasantly surprised) if the got rid of centers.
Maybe you should sacrifice like the rest of us and buy or rent in a better school district.
Anonymous wrote:Where do those kids go to center then? Outside the pyramid?
How many elementary school centers feed their non AAP students into both Poe and Holmes?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
I think the only way to do this for 2016-17 would be to close AAP Centers altogether and eliminate Level II and Level III as well.
So, then what happens to the kids that are truly gifted? If they're considering closing AAP centers down or eliminating the program, they need to have contingencies in place for the kids in the top 1-3percentile. Would they go to IEP plans or whatever they are called?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
I think the only way to do this for 2016-17 would be to close AAP Centers altogether and eliminate Level II and Level III as well.
So, then what happens to the kids that are truly gifted? If they're considering closing AAP centers down or eliminating the program, they need to have contingencies in place for the kids in the top 1-3percentile. Would they go to IEP plans or whatever they are called?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
I think the only way to do this for 2016-17 would be to close AAP Centers altogether and eliminate Level II and Level III as well.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
I would like to see a break out of that number - grade by grade. I know when my children were in MS, they were counted as AAP as they took all Honors for the four core classes. I would also like to see the break out by Level I, II, III and IV.
The 23% probably includes the Level III AAP. It is in FCAG to present the highest number of participants they can.
Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
Anonymous wrote:The FCAG email said that 21% of elementary students are in AAP, and the percentage is higher in some areas. That seems like a very high percentage to me. It used to be about 10% overall and that seemed to work well.
How difficult would it be at this point to get back to 10% as a goal? It would save money and improve the program at the same time, if they could do it. The alternative appears to be to eliminate the program altogether, which actually might be easier to sell to parents than the idea of ratcheting the program back.
Anonymous wrote:Where do those kids go to center then? Outside the pyramid?
How many elementary school centers feed their non AAP students into both Poe and Holmes?