Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll just point out again that it's not Longfellow enrollment trends that will force changes at Cooper. It's the declining enrollment at Cooper and the overcrowding at Kilmer, which gets the Cooper AAP kids from Great Falls.

PP here-I believe I already stated that I wasn't qualified to comment on Kilmer, so the above snotty comment wasn't necessary.

I really don't get why the school board feels it makes sense to have AAP in all middle achools. In Cluster 1, it makes most sense for Longfellow to be THE center for middle school. They clearly have the teaching resources and extracurricular infrastructure already in place as well as the renovated building. It would also solve the problems of critical mass and AAP vs Non AAP populations. If transportation is the issue do limited or no bussing. I would gladly drive my kid for an advanced education in an established center-and I'm sure others feel the same, since clearly the main issue here is money (or lack thereof in FCPS) driving these decisions.

It doesn't make sense when Cooper is under capacity because they send AAP students to Longfeloow and Longfellow is over capacity becasue of those same students. There are plenty of AAP students in the Cooper district for a robust AAp program. I would also send half the expereince AAP teachers at Longfellow to Cooper so they can benefit from the experienced teacher resources. The extracurricular stuff could easily be done at Cooper now. I don't know why they don't do it currently. The issue isn't money (as it wouldn't save all that much), it is space and the fact that the over large AAP population at Longfellow adversely affects the Gen- Ed population at Longfellow.

Therein lies the problem-none of the Longfellow teachers would be willing to come over to Cooper to get a new center up and running-if there were, I'm sure parents at Churchill and Spring Hill would feel differently about allowing their kids to be a "guinea pig" for a new center. It takes time and energy as well as appropriate, qualified center teachers to lead a new center-and despite all of the recent talk on the subject, Cooper seems to be doing nothing in the meantime to make itself more attractive to kids currently at the Churchill Road Center or Spring Hill local level IV.

I sure as heck don't want my 5th grader to be part of the pseudo-center at Cooper they keep talking about creating, and I doubt many would-and given property taxes I pay to live in the Langley pyramid, it should be my choice to do what's best for my kid.

First of all, don't forget about Colvin Run which also feeds into Cooper, Longfellow, and Cooper.

As a current Cooper parent, I am very happy that Cooper is "doing nothing to make itself more attractive" to the AAP population. Cooper, as it is right now, is a wonderful school and doesn't need to make itself more appealing for a select group of students. Why would they? I agree with a PP who said Cooper should remain a Gen Ed school, taking Gen Ed kids from Longfellow as well. I think making Longfellow an AAP only center is a great idea. Let's not forget why there is overcrowding in the AAP centers in the first place: FCPS has admitted far too many kids into the program in recent years. It's not Cooper's fault that there are fewer and fewer Gen Ed kids; it's FCPS! Why should Cooper have to absorb the AAP overflow when the Gen Ed population has gotten the short end of the stick for years? Why on earth should Gen Ed kids have to bend over backwards to accomodate a "special" program at Cooper? We [b]also live in the Langley pyramid and we also pay exorbitant property taxes; frankly, the one benefit we parents of Gen Ed kids have is a middle school that has NO AAP! Long may that last[/b].

Anonymous wrote:The unrenovated Cooper appears to be the only school that would be bricks and mortar overcapacity if all AAP was at the base schools. Do any other middle schools in northern Fairfax County have a modular as a long term capacity solution? Cooper is 141 under.

The dashboard shows:
Longfellow transfer in AAP 103
Cooper transfer out AAP 326=103 from Mclean zipcodes to Longfellow + 226 from Great Falls/Vienna/Reston/Herndon area to Kilmer
Kilmer transfer in AAP 244=226 from Cooper
Jackson transfer in AAP 83
Thoreau transfer out AAP 101=83 to Jackson and 18 to Kilmer
Herndon transfer out AAP 42
Hughes transfer in AAP 44

Anonymous wrote:

Then why is the subject of this thread, "Longfellow MS AAP overcrowding plans"? I'm one of the Cooper parents who would very much prefer not having a center at Cooper, but according to some (rumors?) here on DCUM, Cooper will indeed be starting a center to "help alleviate overcrowding at Longfellow's AAP center". So, which is it? What is the truth here?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From where I'm sitting it seems the anti-AAP posters are trying vey hard to drown out voices that disagree with them. BTW, see the other thread on this board right now on which a number of posters have posted similar observations that middle school honors classes seem to be significantly less challenging than AAP.

You're kidding, right? Every time a parent of a Gen Ed student (or of both GE and AAP students) has an opinion regarding AAP, s/he is completely dismissed by those who only have AAP kids and who feel AAP is the end-all, be-all. It's amazing to me that FCPS bends over backwards to accomodate all the parents who insist their child be in this program. If the admissions criteria were raised, we wouldn't be having the problem of over-crowding and likely most current AAP students would instead be in Gen Ed. If FCPS spent a fraction of the energy, money, and time on Gen Ed students that they've been spending on AAP issues like testing, identification, over-crowding, etc., imagine what a great General Ed. program we would have. But instead, they're completely cowed by aggressive, pushy parents who insist on the status quo (not particularly high admittance criteria) so that their average kids can be in the program. The whole system is corrupt and is failing the majority of kids in FCPS, the Gen Ed population. Not to mention the highly gifted kids who aren't even in a gifted program.

I don't know how many more times you can repeat this same mantra that the AAP program is responsible for so many of the school system's problems but the only takers are parents with a similar axe to grind, presumably parents of kids I can only assume you would describe as what, below average? I don't know why you believe it is responsible for all overcrowding; it's not at all clear that it is failing the GE population -- there are many arguments to the contrary; the budget for AAP is actually quite small and pales in comparison to GE and certainly to Special Ed, which serves far fewer children, probably compared to a number of other programs, especially in relation to kids served. Also, stop with the constant implication that every defender of AAP has "average children"? Believe it or not, there are many families around here with multiple kids with 130 and 140+ test scores (yes, uncoached), high GBRS, etc -- their crime is to accept the placement their child's teachers and the school system said was appropriate? Many moved here because they knew our child(ren) were candidates. I can assure you that many of these parents believe the system has been corrupted, if at all, by political correctness and trying to please parents like yourself, even when it's not educationally sound.

What's your end goal anyway -- you really think that you'd prefer an "average" student population? Or you just want to pretend everyone's the same? Do you not want to acknowledge that the AAP program in FCPS has long been considered a model system, which attracts and retains some of the brightest children and their families to come to FCPS? You could drive out many of the truly "highly gifted" but if not you still might not really be happy with the resulting model . . . Based on your post's fuzzy logic and unfounded accusations, I suppose that the program just makes you so crazy for personal reasons that you just want it gone, and you'll blame anything and everything on it, reason and reality be damned.

I'm wondering how you think it's possible that the Gen Ed population has not been failed by the vast expansion of AAP. Gen Ed classes have been depleted over the past few years due to so many average children being placed (often times through appeals) into AAP. Of course no one wants to pretend everyone is "the same". But to say that the masses of AAP children are, indeed, all gifted, is simply wishful thinking. If it were a program for highly gifted kids (as originally intended), the kids who actually need a specialized learning environment, then most parents would be supporters of the program, whether or not their child was in it. I think everyone agrees there should be a gifted program, but perhaps we could limit it to kids who are, in reality, gifted. Surely you're not arguing that every child currently in AAP needs a different learning environment? Because, frankly, this is the fuzziest logic yet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From where I'm sitting it seems the anti-AAP posters are trying vey hard to drown out voices that disagree with them. BTW, see the other thread on this board right now on which a number of posters have posted similar observations that middle school honors classes seem to be significantly less challenging than AAP.

You're kidding, right? Every time a parent of a Gen Ed student (or of both GE and AAP students) has an opinion regarding AAP, s/he is completely dismissed by those who only have AAP kids and who feel AAP is the end-all, be-all. It's amazing to me that FCPS bends over backwards to accomodate all the parents who insist their child be in this program. If the admissions criteria were raised, we wouldn't be having the problem of over-crowding and likely most current AAP students would instead be in Gen Ed. If FCPS spent a fraction of the energy, money, and time on Gen Ed students that they've been spending on AAP issues like testing, identification, over-crowding, etc., imagine what a great General Ed. program we would have. But instead, they're completely cowed by aggressive, pushy parents who insist on the status quo (not particularly high admittance criteria) so that their average kids can be in the program. The whole system is corrupt and is failing the majority of kids in FCPS, the Gen Ed population. Not to mention the highly gifted kids who aren't even in a gifted program.

I don't know how many more times you can repeat this same mantra that the AAP program is responsible for so many of the school system's problems but the only takers are parents with a similar axe to grind, presumably parents of kids I can only assume you would describe as what, below average? I don't know why you believe it is responsible for all overcrowding; it's not at all clear that it is failing the GE population -- there are many arguments to the contrary; the budget for AAP is actually quite small and pales in comparison to GE and certainly to Special Ed, which serves far fewer children, probably compared to a number of other programs, especially in relation to kids served. Also, stop with the constant implication that every defender of AAP has "average children"? Believe it or not, there are many families around here with multiple kids with 130 and 140+ test scores (yes, uncoached), high GBRS, etc -- their crime is to accept the placement their child's teachers and the school system said was appropriate? Many moved here because they knew our child(ren) were candidates. I can assure you that many of these parents believe the system has been corrupted, if at all, by political correctness and trying to please parents like yourself, even when it's not educationally sound.

What's your end goal anyway -- you really think that you'd prefer an "average" student population? Or you just want to pretend everyone's the same? Do you not want to acknowledge that the AAP program in FCPS has long been considered a model system, which attracts and retains some of the brightest children and their families to come to FCPS? You could drive out many of the truly "highly gifted" but if not you still might not really be happy with the resulting model . . . Based on your post's fuzzy logic and unfounded accusations, I suppose that the program just makes you so crazy for personal reasons that you just want it gone, and you'll blame anything and everything on it, reason and reality be damned.

AMEN to this post...I actually had one GE parent insinuate that my DC would not be in AAP if it weren't for the low standards-how the heck do they presume to know my kid's CoGAT and GBRS? Really huge chip on their shoulder...and again, this thread is way off topic because of the AAP haters in the crowd..

This thread isn't off-topic at all. The issue is overcrowding at AAP centers, specifically Longfellow. The reason there is overcrowding there in the first place is due to the over-admittance of kids to AAP. It's a pretty simple connection to make.

Just not true. First of all, Longfellow is still under capacity, so I don't even know why you are saying it's so overcrowded. Perhaps you have just heard the "sky is falling" predictions -- FCPS data is notoriously unreliable and often manipulated to advance an agenda -- in this case the goal of starting center at Cooper. Yes, LMS is a very large middle school, no doubt, but it was built & renovated to accommodate 1350 kids. Perhaps you know that a lot of those kids are in AAP? But the vast majority of them would attend Longfellow whether they were in AAP or GE, as it is their base MS. Whether they were "over-admitted" to AAP -- complete speculation on your part anyway -- really makes little difference to the enrollment at LMS. The smallest population at LMS are the kids attending for AAP from other base middle schools, and anyone familiar with this group of kids, many of whom are the top math kids, top science olympiad, many headed for TJ -- they are not the poster children for your theory that AAP has let in a bunch of average kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From where I'm sitting it seems the anti-AAP posters are trying vey hard to drown out voices that disagree with them. BTW, see the other thread on this board right now on which a number of posters have posted similar observations that middle school honors classes seem to be significantly less challenging than AAP.

You're kidding, right? Every time a parent of a Gen Ed student (or of both GE and AAP students) has an opinion regarding AAP, s/he is completely dismissed by those who only have AAP kids and who feel AAP is the end-all, be-all. It's amazing to me that FCPS bends over backwards to accomodate all the parents who insist their child be in this program. If the admissions criteria were raised, we wouldn't be having the problem of over-crowding and likely most current AAP students would instead be in Gen Ed. If FCPS spent a fraction of the energy, money, and time on Gen Ed students that they've been spending on AAP issues like testing, identification, over-crowding, etc., imagine what a great General Ed. program we would have. But instead, they're completely cowed by aggressive, pushy parents who insist on the status quo (not particularly high admittance criteria) so that their average kids can be in the program. The whole system is corrupt and is failing the majority of kids in FCPS, the Gen Ed population. Not to mention the highly gifted kids who aren't even in a gifted program.

I don't know how many more times you can repeat this same mantra that the AAP program is responsible for so many of the school system's problems but the only takers are parents with a similar axe to grind, presumably parents of kids I can only assume you would describe as what, below average? I don't know why you believe it is responsible for all overcrowding; it's not at all clear that it is failing the GE population -- there are many arguments to the contrary; the budget for AAP is actually quite small and pales in comparison to GE and certainly to Special Ed, which serves far fewer children, probably compared to a number of other programs, especially in relation to kids served. Also, stop with the constant implication that every defender of AAP has "average children"? Believe it or not, there are many families around here with multiple kids with 130 and 140+ test scores (yes, uncoached), high GBRS, etc -- their crime is to accept the placement their child's teachers and the school system said was appropriate? Many moved here because they knew our child(ren) were candidates. I can assure you that many of these parents believe the system has been corrupted, if at all, by political correctness and trying to please parents like yourself, even when it's not educationally sound.

What's your end goal anyway -- you really think that you'd prefer an "average" student population? Or you just want to pretend everyone's the same? Do you not want to acknowledge that the AAP program in FCPS has long been considered a model system, which attracts and retains some of the brightest children and their families to come to FCPS? You could drive out many of the truly "highly gifted" but if not you still might not really be happy with the resulting model . . . Based on your post's fuzzy logic and unfounded accusations, I suppose that the program just makes you so crazy for personal reasons that you just want it gone, and you'll blame anything and everything on it, reason and reality be damned.

AMEN to this post...I actually had one GE parent insinuate that my DC would not be in AAP if it weren't for the low standards-how the heck do they presume to know my kid's CoGAT and GBRS? Really huge chip on their shoulder...and again, this thread is way off topic because of the AAP haters in the crowd..

This thread isn't off-topic at all. The issue is overcrowding at AAP centers, specifically Longfellow. The reason there is overcrowding there in the first place is due to the over-admittance of kids to AAP. It's a pretty simple connection to make.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From where I'm sitting it seems the anti-AAP posters are trying vey hard to drown out voices that disagree with them. BTW, see the other thread on this board right now on which a number of posters have posted similar observations that middle school honors classes seem to be significantly less challenging than AAP.

You're kidding, right? Every time a parent of a Gen Ed student (or of both GE and AAP students) has an opinion regarding AAP, s/he is completely dismissed by those who only have AAP kids and who feel AAP is the end-all, be-all. It's amazing to me that FCPS bends over backwards to accomodate all the parents who insist their child be in this program. If the admissions criteria were raised, we wouldn't be having the problem of over-crowding and likely most current AAP students would instead be in Gen Ed. If FCPS spent a fraction of the energy, money, and time on Gen Ed students that they've been spending on AAP issues like testing, identification, over-crowding, etc., imagine what a great General Ed. program we would have. But instead, they're completely cowed by aggressive, pushy parents who insist on the status quo (not particularly high admittance criteria) so that their average kids can be in the program. The whole system is corrupt and is failing the majority of kids in FCPS, the Gen Ed population. Not to mention the highly gifted kids who aren't even in a gifted program.

I don't know how many more times you can repeat this same mantra that the AAP program is responsible for so many of the school system's problems but the only takers are parents with a similar axe to grind, presumably parents of kids I can only assume you would describe as what, below average? I don't know why you believe it is responsible for all overcrowding; it's not at all clear that it is failing the GE population -- there are many arguments to the contrary; the budget for AAP is actually quite small and pales in comparison to GE and certainly to Special Ed, which serves far fewer children, probably compared to a number of other programs, especially in relation to kids served. Also, stop with the constant implication that every defender of AAP has "average children"? Believe it or not, there are many families around here with multiple kids with 130 and 140+ test scores (yes, uncoached), high GBRS, etc -- their crime is to accept the placement their child's teachers and the school system said was appropriate? Many moved here because they knew our child(ren) were candidates. I can assure you that many of these parents believe the system has been corrupted, if at all, by political correctness and trying to please parents like yourself, even when it's not educationally sound.

What's your end goal anyway -- you really think that you'd prefer an "average" student population? Or you just want to pretend everyone's the same? Do you not want to acknowledge that the AAP program in FCPS has long been considered a model system, which attracts and retains some of the brightest children and their families to come to FCPS? You could drive out many of the truly "highly gifted" but if not you still might not really be happy with the resulting model . . . Based on your post's fuzzy logic and unfounded accusations, I suppose that the program just makes you so crazy for personal reasons that you just want it gone, and you'll blame anything and everything on it, reason and reality be damned.

AMEN to this post...I actually had one GE parent insinuate that my DC would not be in AAP if it weren't for the low standards-how the heck do they presume to know my kid's CoGAT and GBRS? Really huge chip on their shoulder...and again, this thread is way off topic because of the AAP haters in the crowd..

This thread isn't off-topic at all. The issue is overcrowding at AAP centers, specifically Longfellow. The reason there is overcrowding there in the first place is due to the over-admittance of kids to AAP. It's a pretty simple connection to make.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From where I'm sitting it seems the anti-AAP posters are trying vey hard to drown out voices that disagree with them. BTW, see the other thread on this board right now on which a number of posters have posted similar observations that middle school honors classes seem to be significantly less challenging than AAP.

You're kidding, right? Every time a parent of a Gen Ed student (or of both GE and AAP students) has an opinion regarding AAP, s/he is completely dismissed by those who only have AAP kids and who feel AAP is the end-all, be-all. It's amazing to me that FCPS bends over backwards to accomodate all the parents who insist their child be in this program. If the admissions criteria were raised, we wouldn't be having the problem of over-crowding and likely most current AAP students would instead be in Gen Ed. If FCPS spent a fraction of the energy, money, and time on Gen Ed students that they've been spending on AAP issues like testing, identification, over-crowding, etc., imagine what a great General Ed. program we would have. But instead, they're completely cowed by aggressive, pushy parents who insist on the status quo (not particularly high admittance criteria) so that their average kids can be in the program. The whole system is corrupt and is failing the majority of kids in FCPS, the Gen Ed population. Not to mention the highly gifted kids who aren't even in a gifted program.

I don't know how many more times you can repeat this same mantra that the AAP program is responsible for so many of the school system's problems but the only takers are parents with a similar axe to grind, presumably parents of kids I can only assume you would describe as what, below average? I don't know why you believe it is responsible for all overcrowding; it's not at all clear that it is failing the GE population -- there are many arguments to the contrary; the budget for AAP is actually quite small and pales in comparison to GE and certainly to Special Ed, which serves far fewer children, probably compared to a number of other programs, especially in relation to kids served. Also, stop with the constant implication that every defender of AAP has "average children"? Believe it or not, there are many families around here with multiple kids with 130 and 140+ test scores (yes, uncoached), high GBRS, etc -- their crime is to accept the placement their child's teachers and the school system said was appropriate? Many moved here because they knew our child(ren) were candidates. I can assure you that many of these parents believe the system has been corrupted, if at all, by political correctness and trying to please parents like yourself, even when it's not educationally sound.

What's your end goal anyway -- you really think that you'd prefer an "average" student population? Or you just want to pretend everyone's the same? Do you not want to acknowledge that the AAP program in FCPS has long been considered a model system, which attracts and retains some of the brightest children and their families to come to FCPS? You could drive out many of the truly "highly gifted" but if not you still might not really be happy with the resulting model . . . Based on your post's fuzzy logic and unfounded accusations, I suppose that the program just makes you so crazy for personal reasons that you just want it gone, and you'll blame anything and everything on it, reason and reality be damned.

AMEN to this post...I actually had one GE parent insinuate that my DC would not be in AAP if it weren't for the low standards-how the heck do they presume to know my kid's CoGAT and GBRS? Really huge chip on their shoulder...and again, this thread is way off topic because of the AAP haters in the crowd..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From where I'm sitting it seems the anti-AAP posters are trying vey hard to drown out voices that disagree with them. BTW, see the other thread on this board right now on which a number of posters have posted similar observations that middle school honors classes seem to be significantly less challenging than AAP.

You're kidding, right? Every time a parent of a Gen Ed student (or of both GE and AAP students) has an opinion regarding AAP, s/he is completely dismissed by those who only have AAP kids and who feel AAP is the end-all, be-all. It's amazing to me that FCPS bends over backwards to accomodate all the parents who insist their child be in this program. If the admissions criteria were raised, we wouldn't be having the problem of over-crowding and likely most current AAP students would instead be in Gen Ed. If FCPS spent a fraction of the energy, money, and time on Gen Ed students that they've been spending on AAP issues like testing, identification, over-crowding, etc., imagine what a great General Ed. program we would have. But instead, they're completely cowed by aggressive, pushy parents who insist on the status quo (not particularly high admittance criteria) so that their average kids can be in the program. The whole system is corrupt and is failing the majority of kids in FCPS, the Gen Ed population. Not to mention the highly gifted kids who aren't even in a gifted program.

I don't know how many more times you can repeat this same mantra that the AAP program is responsible for so many of the school system's problems but the only takers are parents with a similar axe to grind, presumably parents of kids I can only assume you would describe as what, below average? I don't know why you believe it is responsible for all overcrowding; it's not at all clear that it is failing the GE population -- there are many arguments to the contrary; the budget for AAP is actually quite small and pales in comparison to GE and certainly to Special Ed, which serves far fewer children, probably compared to a number of other programs, especially in relation to kids served. Also, stop with the constant implication that every defender of AAP has "average children"? Believe it or not, there are many families around here with multiple kids with 130 and 140+ test scores (yes, uncoached), high GBRS, etc -- their crime is to accept the placement their child's teachers and the school system said was appropriate? Many moved here because they knew our child(ren) were candidates. I can assure you that many of these parents believe the system has been corrupted, if at all, by political correctness and trying to please parents like yourself, even when it's not educationally sound.

What's your end goal anyway -- you really think that you'd prefer an "average" student population? Or you just want to pretend everyone's the same? Do you not want to acknowledge that the AAP program in FCPS has long been considered a model system, which attracts and retains some of the brightest children and their families to come to FCPS? You could drive out many of the truly "highly gifted" but if not you still might not really be happy with the resulting model . . . Based on your post's fuzzy logic and unfounded accusations, I suppose that the program just makes you so crazy for personal reasons that you just want it gone, and you'll blame anything and everything on it, reason and reality be damned.