TJ is a governor's school -- that might be different.

Since TJ is a center, will this busing also be eliminated. Are magnet ES schools being eliminated?

"screening" may be required, but what if they "screened" by using the current tests and then just let the AART and teachers at the school take (a) any kid who meets a certain cut off (like 135) and then the teachers/aart can fill out the rest of the class with any other kids who have been referred and have a high score or any kids they think might fit in. Isn't that what happens now with local level 4? Principals can fill out the class with good students who weren't officially designated "AAP."

My point is -- they could still "screen" in multiple ways without going through the whole committee review process. They would simply make the assignment to the level 4 class a much more local decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that the proposal to put level 4 in every ES is just a backdoor way of saying "no more centers."

How would there be any savings if you are putting local level 4 classes in every ES and still keeping all the existing centers? Wouldn't that be more expensive???? Unless you are actually closing the centers -----> thereby saving the costs of busing and perhaps saving the costs of selecting kids for centers. Maybe part of the "savings" is that AARTs and teachers just place kids in local level 4s (no busing, no "in pool" committees)?

They can't just place the students. There must be testing and screening for gifted services as mandated by Virginia. Even if they eliminate centers the screening prpcess would still exist.

+1. Screening is required by VA law. http://www.doe.virginia.gov/instruction/gifted_ed/gifted_regulations.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that the proposal to put level 4 in every ES is just a backdoor way of saying "no more centers."

How would there be any savings if you are putting local level 4 classes in every ES and still keeping all the existing centers? Wouldn't that be more expensive???? Unless you are actually closing the centers -----> thereby saving the costs of busing and perhaps saving the costs of selecting kids for centers. Maybe part of the "savings" is that AARTs and teachers just place kids in local level 4s (no busing, no "in pool" committees)?

That couldn't be, that would just be tracking. I agree, not sure how it saves money and might even cost more (as centers may maximize economies of scale).

AAP as a whole is tracking! It's one big tracking program, so they might as well end it and simply track kids into the appropriate group for them in each subject.

AAP is not tracking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that the proposal to put level 4 in every ES is just a backdoor way of saying "no more centers."

How would there be any savings if you are putting local level 4 classes in every ES and still keeping all the existing centers? Wouldn't that be more expensive???? Unless you are actually closing the centers -----> thereby saving the costs of busing and perhaps saving the costs of selecting kids for centers. Maybe part of the "savings" is that AARTs and teachers just place kids in local level 4s (no busing, no "in pool" committees)?

That couldn't be, that would just be tracking. I agree, not sure how it saves money and might even cost more (as centers may maximize economies of scale).

AAP as a whole is tracking! It's one big tracking program, so they might as well end it and simply track kids into the appropriate group for them in each subject.

I'm the PP, I think tracking was found to be illegal

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that the proposal to put level 4 in every ES is just a backdoor way of saying "no more centers."

How would there be any savings if you are putting local level 4 classes in every ES and still keeping all the existing centers? Wouldn't that be more expensive???? Unless you are actually closing the centers -----> thereby saving the costs of busing and perhaps saving the costs of selecting kids for centers. Maybe part of the "savings" is that AARTs and teachers just place kids in local level 4s (no busing, no "in pool" committees)?

They can't just place the students. There must be testing and screening for gifted services as mandated by Virginia. Even if they eliminate centers the screening prpcess would still exist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that the proposal to put level 4 in every ES is just a backdoor way of saying "no more centers."

How would there be any savings if you are putting local level 4 classes in every ES and still keeping all the existing centers? Wouldn't that be more expensive???? Unless you are actually closing the centers -----> thereby saving the costs of busing and perhaps saving the costs of selecting kids for centers. Maybe part of the "savings" is that AARTs and teachers just place kids in local level 4s (no busing, no "in pool" committees)?

That couldn't be, that would just be tracking. I agree, not sure how it saves money and might even cost more (as centers may maximize economies of scale).

AAP as a whole is tracking! It's one big tracking program, so they might as well end it and simply track kids into the appropriate group for them in each subject.

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that the proposal to put level 4 in every ES is just a backdoor way of saying "no more centers."

How would there be any savings if you are putting local level 4 classes in every ES and still keeping all the existing centers? Wouldn't that be more expensive???? Unless you are actually closing the centers -----> thereby saving the costs of busing and perhaps saving the costs of selecting kids for centers. Maybe part of the "savings" is that AARTs and teachers just place kids in local level 4s (no busing, no "in pool" committees)?

That would certainly make sense - and save money.

Anonymous wrote:If you are adding level 4 to all elementary schools

And

you are eliminating busing to centers when there is a local level 4, then aren't you eliminating all AAP busing to all centers?

So, what is the point of having centers?

why would you say you are eliminating busing to center "IF there is a local level 4" since according to the other term, all ESs will have local level 4. Why the "if" -- it seems as though there would be few centers if there is no busing at all.

+1
If LLIV is offered at all schools, then centers should be a thing of the past.

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that the proposal to put level 4 in every ES is just a backdoor way of saying "no more centers."

How would there be any savings if you are putting local level 4 classes in every ES and still keeping all the existing centers? Wouldn't that be more expensive???? Unless you are actually closing the centers -----> thereby saving the costs of busing and perhaps saving the costs of selecting kids for centers. Maybe part of the "savings" is that AARTs and teachers just place kids in local level 4s (no busing, no "in pool" committees)?

That couldn't be, that would just be tracking. I agree, not sure how it saves money and might even cost more (as centers may maximize economies of scale).

Honestly, I'm mad. My child is at a center. It's rather far from our house because we were redistricted away from the center that is 4 blocks away. My child went to the center because our school's local level IV program was in its first year and frankly did not seem ready for prime time. I do not want my child to switch schools again. They should at least grandfather in busing for existing students. I'm sure I'll get attacked for this here, but changing very longstanding offerings should include some phase-in time.

Is it possible that the proposal to put level 4 in every ES is just a backdoor way of saying "no more centers."

How would there be any savings if you are putting local level 4 classes in every ES and still keeping all the existing centers? Wouldn't that be more expensive???? Unless you are actually closing the centers -----> thereby saving the costs of busing and perhaps saving the costs of selecting kids for centers. Maybe part of the "savings" is that AARTs and teachers just place kids in local level 4s (no busing, no "in pool" committees)?

Anonymous wrote:Interesting math - if you implement local level 4 and eliminate bussing for $3.1, how can you eliminate bussing again for an additional $1.2?

Exactly. That's why I don't understand how these two separate proposals work.

Interesting math - if you implement local level 4 and eliminate bussing for $3.1, how can you eliminate bussing again for an additional $1.2?