Bright students do not need to be taught in a stand alone facility to get an appropriate education. Students can receive differentiated instruction at their home school. The size of Fairfax's schools ensure that. No where did anyone say that all students should receive the same exact education.

The county has not vastly broadened the pool. If I read it correctly, as far as CogAt, they are decreasing the pool. In the past, they set the CogAt "cut off" at the 90th percentile of Fairfax students, which usually was around the 98th percentile of national students. Now, apparently, they are using a different test and setting the "cut off" at the 95th percentile of Fairfax students. That sounds like a decrease to me.

So it is elitism to educate children the way they need to be educated? Check out the research on how to educate GT students that is easily available by viewing FCPS's expert's testimony at one of the December meetings (I think work session). These cries of elitism really bother me. So, we should treat everyone exactly the same regardless of their needs and abilities? AAP does not provide better instruction it provides different instruction to children who need it (of course, the county has vastly broadened that pool which I figure is the reason this program causes so much angst).

To those of you who cry elitism, I assume that your reasoning applies equally to sports? So my kid who has absolutely no sports skills should get to play on travel soccer, elite swim teams, varsity sports ...?

I hear people crying elitism with regard to TJ all the time. We must listen to differently. The fact that TJ's socio-economic student base is soooooo far off the county norm is one glaring indication.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, those are problems they are going to face anyway. They need more school space. Many schools, not just Haycock, are very overcrowded. They are going to have to renovate empty buildings or build schools in the coming years. Why couldn't they renovate/build an AAP center or two? When they do open new schools they are going to have to redistrict, which will upset people. THis could actually be easier politically.

No. It's not easier politically, and you'd have to have your elitist head pretty firmly up your ass to think otherwise.

These ideas are, in a fundamental sense, un-American. People would associate them with China or what used to be East Germany. The idea that some kids would have to walk or get bussed past a renovated center to get to their own school is sad.

Ever heard of TJ? I don't see many people crying elitism and petitioning to shut it down.

Anonymous wrote:PP, those are problems they are going to face anyway. They need more school space. Many schools, not just Haycock, are very overcrowded. They are going to have to renovate empty buildings or build schools in the coming years. Why couldn't they renovate/build an AAP center or two? When they do open new schools they are going to have to redistrict, which will upset people. THis could actually be easier politically.

No. It's not easier politically, and you'd have to have your elitist head pretty firmly up your ass to think otherwise.

These ideas are, in a fundamental sense, un-American. People would associate them with China or what used to be East Germany. The idea that some kids would have to walk or get bussed past a renovated center to get to their own school is sad.

Anonymous wrote:PP, those are problems they are going to face anyway. They need more school space. Many schools, not just Haycock, are very overcrowded. They are going to have to renovate empty buildings or build schools in the coming years. Why couldn't they renovate/build an AAP center or two? When they do open new schools they are going to have to redistrict, which will upset people. THis could actually be easier politically.

Politically it screams elitism. People are more willing to have a new neighborhood school in their backyard than an "elite" academy that may or may not include their children.

In the Haycock/Freedom Hill area there are two former schools they could use (moving out existing "tenants" and finding alternate spaces for them and completely rebuilding them to todays standards) to relieve the general over crowding in Cluster I and II. One is Lewinsville and one is Dunn Lorring. I think those are prime sites for when the expected increase in enrollment from Tysons development eventually comes.

PP, those are problems they are going to face anyway. They need more school space. Many schools, not just Haycock, are very overcrowded. They are going to have to renovate empty buildings or build schools in the coming years. Why couldn't they renovate/build an AAP center or two? When they do open new schools they are going to have to redistrict, which will upset people. THis could actually be easier politically.

Anonymous wrote:Standalone centers would solve everything. They could have one in each cluster. Why have they never explored this option?

Cost and lack of facilities.

I don't know, PP. It seems so logical. There is so much tension between the base communities and the AAP center communities. It makes a lot of sense to me. I've been told by some who are more cynical to me that they plan to eliminate the centers eventually so they'd never actually create a center only. Also, they argue the transportation costs are too high.

If parents think it's a good idea, perhaps they should email their board member. If people asked for it, maybe they'd explore it.

Standalone centers would solve everything. They could have one in each cluster. Why have they never explored this option?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the PP who said Haycock local level IV would be a center education, it would not be. A grade of only 30s or 40s is not still a center. Critical mass is currently being defined as about 50 per grade for center education.

But Haycock is overcrowded and will be undergoing renovation.

The Center should be moved out altogether and instead offer Local Level IV in its place, just as the original plan was for Hunters Woods. That gives enough swing space for the renovation and the Haycock students in AAP still get the Local Level IV program. In addition, the principal can fill the classes out with other "almost Center-eligible" kids from the bright students at Haycock so you would have two classes per grade level, meeting the critical mass readiness factor.

This was discussed by some cluster 2 parents, who proposed a standalone AAP center, leaving LLIV at Haycock. They were told the Haycock base community did not support it and the county does not support the idea of a standalone center.

I did not hear such a statement during the work session.

Several folks from the county have said that, Ms. Strauss included. Perhaps not publicly, but it has been said. It's too bad because I think a standalone center would solve a lot of the problems, but I'm not elected to the board, so I guess it's not my choice.

I guess we'll have to wait until Friday at 3 p.m.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the PP who said Haycock local level IV would be a center education, it would not be. A grade of only 30s or 40s is not still a center. Critical mass is currently being defined as about 50 per grade for center education.

But Haycock is overcrowded and will be undergoing renovation.

The Center should be moved out altogether and instead offer Local Level IV in its place, just as the original plan was for Hunters Woods. That gives enough swing space for the renovation and the Haycock students in AAP still get the Local Level IV program. In addition, the principal can fill the classes out with other "almost Center-eligible" kids from the bright students at Haycock so you would have two classes per grade level, meeting the critical mass readiness factor.

This was discussed by some cluster 2 parents, who proposed a standalone AAP center, leaving LLIV at Haycock. They were told the Haycock base community did not support it and the county does not support the idea of a standalone center.

I did not hear such a statement during the work session.

Several folks from the county have said that, Ms. Strauss included. Perhaps not publicly, but it has been said. It's too bad because I think a standalone center would solve a lot of the problems, but I'm not elected to the board, so I guess it's not my choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the PP who said Haycock local level IV would be a center education, it would not be. A grade of only 30s or 40s is not still a center. Critical mass is currently being defined as about 50 per grade for center education.

But Haycock is overcrowded and will be undergoing renovation.

The Center should be moved out altogether and instead offer Local Level IV in its place, just as the original plan was for Hunters Woods. That gives enough swing space for the renovation and the Haycock students in AAP still get the Local Level IV program. In addition, the principal can fill the classes out with other "almost Center-eligible" kids from the bright students at Haycock so you would have two classes per grade level, meeting the critical mass readiness factor.

This was discussed by some cluster 2 parents, who proposed a standalone AAP center, leaving LLIV at Haycock. They were told the Haycock base community did not support it and the county does not support the idea of a standalone center.

I did not hear such a statement during the work session.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the PP who said Haycock local level IV would be a center education, it would not be. A grade of only 30s or 40s is not still a center. Critical mass is currently being defined as about 50 per grade for center education.

But Haycock is overcrowded and will be undergoing renovation.

The Center should be moved out altogether and instead offer Local Level IV in its place, just as the original plan was for Hunters Woods. That gives enough swing space for the renovation and the Haycock students in AAP still get the Local Level IV program. In addition, the principal can fill the classes out with other "almost Center-eligible" kids from the bright students at Haycock so you would have two classes per grade level, meeting the critical mass readiness factor.

This was discussed by some cluster 2 parents, who proposed a standalone AAP center, leaving LLIV at Haycock. They were told the Haycock base community did not support it and the county does not support the idea of a standalone center.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the PP who said Haycock local level IV would be a center education, it would not be. A grade of only 30s or 40s is not still a center. Critical mass is currently being defined as about 50 per grade for center education.

But Haycock is overcrowded and will be undergoing renovation.

The Center should be moved out altogether and instead offer Local Level IV in its place, just as the original plan was for Hunters Woods. That gives enough swing space for the renovation and the Haycock students in AAP still get the Local Level IV program. In addition, the principal can fill the classes out with other "almost Center-eligible" kids from the bright students at Haycock so you would have two classes per grade level, meeting the critical mass readiness factor.

Not in the cards.