Anonymous wrote:Yes, at our school, the kids have almost no science, but added up, four days of music-related classes a week, and one day a week of "guidance" class. The AAP kids barely even passed the science SOLs. That is insane.

WT? That is insane!!! Sometimes I really don't understand what FCPS is doing? I thought it would be run more like a franchise where each school must follow guidelines given down from the top, but it seems to be more like individual mom and pop shops where each school can do it's own thing.

Yes, at our school, the kids have almost no science, but added up, four days of music-related classes a week, and one day a week of "guidance" class. The AAP kids barely even passed the science SOLs. That is insane.

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why instruction boils down to "many schools" why aren't all the schools in FCPS doing this? Isn't there supposed to be a county curriculum?

There is a Program of Studies with approved instructional materials and resources available to address the Program of Studies and each school principal decides how services will be delivered at her/his school. This is site-based management.

Link to Program of Studies, Approved Instructional Materials, and Resources:
http://www.fcps.edu/is/pos/index.shtml

Science and Social Studies is 4 hours a week at our school and often it's only 3 because of some event or school delay. This is the bigger issue than the curriculum used. I don't think AAP or general ed is strong in these subjects.

Anonymous wrote:You think there are tons of kids in general ed not in level 2 or level 3 classes who could rise to the challenge? What basis do you have for this opinion? First off, all children are already able to access math a grade above for all grades, so level 2 services are available to all who qualify regardless of any AAP level 2,3, or 4 status. Speak to your school board and administration if this is an issue at your school. Also, at most schools, there is differentiation in language arts with reading groups and writing assignments in general ed. If your child isn't in the top general ed group which should be close if not exactly like the level 4 program there is probably a reason. Many schools are implanting level 4 social studies and science programs for all already so general ed children have access to this. The real problem with science and social studies is that the instruction is too short, not the level of teaching. So in conclusion, if your child isn't receiving advanced instruction it is either because of the child's abilities or your specific school, not any policy within FCPS as a whole.

I don't understand why instruction boils down to "many schools" why aren't all the schools in FCPS doing this? Isn't there supposed to be a county curriculum??? The fact that there is not is part of the issue with why people who's kids are maybe in 90-97th percentile also try to clamor for centers, as a way to ensure their child gets what they need as opposed to hoping a base school does it. Those kids shouldn't be in gen ed classes that barely teach science and social studies, even if they're getting level III Language Arts and Math.

You think there are tons of kids in general ed not in level 2 or level 3 classes who could rise to the challenge? What basis do you have for this opinion? First off, all children are already able to access math a grade above for all grades, so level 2 services are available to all who qualify regardless of any AAP level 2,3, or 4 status. Speak to your school board and administration if this is an issue at your school. Also, at most schools, there is differentiation in language arts with reading groups and writing assignments in general ed. If your child isn't in the top general ed group which should be close if not exactly like the level 4 program there is probably a reason. Many schools are implanting level 4 social studies and science programs for all already so general ed children have access to this. The real problem with science and social studies is that the instruction is too short, not the level of teaching. So in conclusion, if your child isn't receiving advanced instruction it is either because of the child's abilities or your specific school, not any policy within FCPS as a whole.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids can get in based on the virtue of their Verbal OR Math abilities. Not all kids are "Advanced" at both subjects, yet at center they are treated like they are.

Manage the differentiation better at the school level. Use some of the funds saved on the giant fustercluck of transportation and logistics to support actual G/T programming in schools on the appropriate subjects for each child.

I couldn't agree with you more. It makes no sense that most of these kids aren't "advanced" in ALL subjects, much less actually gifted (is there any other word that's been overused so much?). There is no reason the vast majority couldn't be differentiated, along with all kids, in their own base schools. I'd love to know just how many HIGHLY gifted kids there are in FCPS, who actually need a separate learning environment. Probably a tiny, tiny fraction of those currently in AAP.

the problem is the differentiation is a joke (LLII and LLIII) so parents of these kids push for AAP because better to not be ready for advancement in all subjects than to be advanced in some and get no advancement.

This PP is right. Differentiation is indeed a joke. Teachers are too overwhelmed and must focus on their class's overall testing scores. So teachers end up having to teach to the kids who need the most remedial help, not come up with anything that truly interests or challenges kids who could do more in a subject.

And this discussion overall misses the point that AAP is about academic aptitude, not achievement at the moment the student enters the AAP center. A kid has to show aptitude for learning, not genius scores and high reading levels etc. DCUM threads about AAP always get mired in test scores and reading grade levels etc. and no one wants to understand that kids are supposed to be placed in it because they have the ability to learn more complex things possibly at a faster pace -- not because they already enter it knowing math three grades ahead and reading at a high school level. It does happen that many kids who qualify do tend to be already advanced in what they know because they've already been learning faster than or differently from other kids, but there is a vocal group on DCUM obsessed with the idea that kids should be bona fide geniuses for any form of AAP, and everyone else should be together in the same classes getting supposed "differentiation" -- it's just ridiculous and leaves out in the cold those bright kids who aren't geniuses but who could rise to challenges well. That could happen in the classroom but in our school it did not, and teachers had to focus on the kids who needed help, not those who could use advancement. That's why parents go for centers so often.

You mean like most of the kids still in Gen. Ed? Because I assure you: most of them are very bright and able to rise to challenges just as well as those in AAP. Which is why leaving the dividing line where it is makes no sense. Either offer advanced classes to every child (because like it or not, every child has potential), or create a far smaller program for kids who are highly gifted.

Or Level II and III pull outs get dropped once resources are needed for SOL prep. This happened at our Title 1 neighborhood school. So you never know what your child is going to get. At least with Level IV you will because it's a dedicated classroom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

the problem is the differentiation is a joke (LLII and LLIII) so parents of these kids push for AAP because better to not be ready for advancement in all subjects than to be advanced in some and get no advancement.

This PP is right. Differentiation is indeed a joke. Teachers are too overwhelmed and must focus on their class's overall testing scores. So teachers end up having to teach to the kids who need the most remedial help, not come up with anything that truly interests or challenges kids who could do more in a subject.

APPLAUSE

Level II (K-2) and Level III (3-6) services are so school AND school YEAR specific because they are not a focus of FCPS, in addition to everything else going on (as detailed by PP).

Excellent Level II and Level III services would help negate the demand of Level IV services (and would not require transportation as the services would be at each neighborhood school).

All of this is true, and something that parents should be pushing for. The problem is that, unlike level IV services, where all the advanced kids can be taught at the same time, this requires genuine pull out, and one or more extra teachers/ AARTs to teach the kids who are pulled out-- and the smaller the pull out groups/ better the differentiation, the larger the price tag. Saying, "at neighborhood schools" is a red herring. Yes, this can be done at the base school. But, levels II and III probably have a higher per pupil cost to implement PROPERLY (which they often are not right now). But I agree this should be provided.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

the problem is the differentiation is a joke (LLII and LLIII) so parents of these kids push for AAP because better to not be ready for advancement in all subjects than to be advanced in some and get no advancement.

This PP is right. Differentiation is indeed a joke. Teachers are too overwhelmed and must focus on their class's overall testing scores. So teachers end up having to teach to the kids who need the most remedial help, not come up with anything that truly interests or challenges kids who could do more in a subject.

APPLAUSE

Level II (K-2) and Level III (3-6) services are so school AND school YEAR specific because they are not a focus of FCPS, in addition to everything else going on (as detailed by PP).

Excellent Level II and Level III services would help negate the demand of Level IV services (and would not require transportation as the services would be at each neighborhood school).

+ 1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

the problem is the differentiation is a joke (LLII and LLIII) so parents of these kids push for AAP because better to not be ready for advancement in all subjects than to be advanced in some and get no advancement.

This PP is right. Differentiation is indeed a joke. Teachers are too overwhelmed and must focus on their class's overall testing scores. So teachers end up having to teach to the kids who need the most remedial help, not come up with anything that truly interests or challenges kids who could do more in a subject.

APPLAUSE

Level II (K-2) and Level III (3-6) services are so school AND school YEAR specific because they are not a focus of FCPS, in addition to everything else going on (as detailed by PP).

Excellent Level II and Level III services would help negate the demand of Level IV services (and would not require transportation as the services would be at each neighborhood school).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids can get in based on the virtue of their Verbal OR Math abilities. Not all kids are "Advanced" at both subjects, yet at center they are treated like they are.

Manage the differentiation better at the school level. Use some of the funds saved on the giant fustercluck of transportation and logistics to support actual G/T programming in schools on the appropriate subjects for each child.

I couldn't agree with you more. It makes no sense that most of these kids aren't "advanced" in ALL subjects, much less actually gifted (is there any other word that's been overused so much?). There is no reason the vast majority couldn't be differentiated, along with all kids, in their own base schools. I'd love to know just how many HIGHLY gifted kids there are in FCPS, who actually need a separate learning environment. Probably a tiny, tiny fraction of those currently in AAP.

the problem is the differentiation is a joke (LLII and LLIII) so parents of these kids push for AAP because better to not be ready for advancement in all subjects than to be advanced in some and get no advancement.

This PP is right. Differentiation is indeed a joke. Teachers are too overwhelmed and must focus on their class's overall testing scores. So teachers end up having to teach to the kids who need the most remedial help, not come up with anything that truly interests or challenges kids who could do more in a subject.

And this discussion overall misses the point that AAP is about academic aptitude, not achievement at the moment the student enters the AAP center. A kid has to show aptitude for learning, not genius scores and high reading levels etc. DCUM threads about AAP always get mired in test scores and reading grade levels etc. and no one wants to understand that kids are supposed to be placed in it because they have the ability to learn more complex things possibly at a faster pace -- not because they already enter it knowing math three grades ahead and reading at a high school level. It does happen that many kids who qualify do tend to be already advanced in what they know because they've already been learning faster than or differently from other kids, but there is a vocal group on DCUM obsessed with the idea that kids should be bona fide geniuses for any form of AAP, and everyone else should be together in the same classes getting supposed "differentiation" -- it's just ridiculous and leaves out in the cold those bright kids who aren't geniuses but who could rise to challenges well. That could happen in the classroom but in our school it did not, and teachers had to focus on the kids who needed help, not those who could use advancement. That's why parents go for centers so often.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At most middle schools in the county, there will be about 20% in AAP, 80% gen ed. There are exception. For example, Luther Jackson is about 50% AAP, but that is because they are the only center that serves Madison, and possibly Oakton. When they finish the renovations at thoreau, The madison students will probably go to Thoreau.

Here is the problem: you, the sanctimonious one, are failing to look at the big picture. THIS IS TEMPORARY. The Louise Archer kids that made AAP so big at CR will not be at the same middle school; they will go to Luther Jackson, Thoreau or Kilmer.

As for your attitude, your selfishness truly amazes me. I mean, you chose to live in Colvin Run, which has been an AAP center for quite a while (maybe since it was built?).

Because your brat, I mean snowflake did not get in to AAP, you want to torch a system that works. Maybe the problem is your kid

Thank you for demonstrating just how ugly and self-serving the typical AAP parent is. Wow.

Not the PP, but really? Because the crazy CR mom has called AAP parents selfish, and said that AAP kids are snowflakes, brats, and all that is wrong with the AAP system. Pretty much on every thread on a daily basis. Most AAP posters are just too restrained/ nice to fight back, or say what we are all thinking, which is that you think your child should have been selected for AAP, are are pissed that s/he was not. Otherwise, you would confine your posts to the issues at your school-- in relevant threads, rather than attacking everything and everyone associated with AAP in every thread. And really, people who act like this take a lot of sympathy away from your legitimate concerns about legitimate problems, like the situation in the 6th grade at CR.

Again: WHO ARE YOU TALKING TO? FFS. There are several parents from Colvin Run who post here, not just one. You seem to be addressing all your posts to this one person. My kids don't even go to CR (they unfortunately attend another center), but I agree with every word these people have to say. I haven't seen anyone call AAP kids brats, but I sure did see the recent post calling GE kids brats. Seems that's ok by you. And to say that "most AAP posters are just too restrained/nice to fight back" was hysterical. Some of the nastiest posters on DCUM are the AAP parents right here on this forum.

As for me, I'm not at all upset that my child wasn't selected for AAP. I never assumed s/he would be, so that wasn't an issue. The issue arises when the GE classes are depleted because of pushy parents clamoring, appealing, and WISC-ing their kids into AAP.

The problem I and other parents have with AAP is the entitlement mentality that so many parents involved with this program have. If this were a private school, no problem. But as it's a public school system, many of us are fed up with this one program taking up so much bandwidth. And by the way: the thread title is "One Compelling Reason Centers Need to Go," so those anti-center posts you're talking about are perfectly relevant here. I can think of far more than one reason and I'm not going to be intimidated by you or anyone else into keeping quiet about it. The basic reasons centers need to go have to do with all centers, not just CR.

1. How exactly do you know that more than one CR parent posts on an anonymous Internet forum, especially if Your kids don't go there? Are you Jeff?

2. 17% of the kids in AAP don't "deplete" anything.

3. You clearly aren't reading a large portion of the posts, because there are indeed one or more GE parents who don't constructively criticize, but are just nasty about the AAP program, the AAP parents, and, yes, the AAP kids.

1. I know that more than one CR parent posts here because I'm friends with two of them, and I know which posts are theirs and obviously which posts are mine. Therefore, the other posts are written by other people. Get it? I know it's difficult to comprehend that more than one person isn't aboard the AAP center fan club train, but it's true.

2. 17% (more is actually likely) when compounded into a center school create a ginormous imbalance between the few GE classes and the many AAP. And because this thread is about centers, the center environment is what I'm referring to. Not a typical base school.

3. I've read every one of these posts, though I don't chime in often. There are absolutely some ugly comments written by AAP parents about GE kids. Please don't pretend it's only GE parents.

Even more reason why I feel like I should disqualify a lot of the anti-AAP comments. I just really feel like Langley is their own little bubble and doesn't speak for FCPS as a whole. So if they want to do something different for their pyramid because of the huge numbers of AAP students which FCPS has also agreed to, go right ahead, but don't drag down the rest of FCPS with you. You don't speak for all of FCPS.

You should disqualify a lot of the anti-AAP comments? Because you fancy yourself the arbiter of what is and isn't acceptable on these forums? Umm... I think not.

Umm no. I think I should now disqualify a lot of the anti-AAP comments, because I've realized a lot of the anti-AAP comments are coming from 3 Colvin Run moms who are projecting their own issues with AAP at their specific school toward the entire county's AAP program. It's already realized by the school board that the McLean and Langley pyramids have many more AAP students than any other part of the county and they are already coming up with their own way of dealing with AAP at those elementary feeder schools. Why is this action not enough for the Colvin Run moms? It's been in the works for several years and just needs the impetus from them this year to make it final. I think they live in a bubble though and don't realize that there are many areas of the county that are benefitting from AAP. Colvin Run only has one feeder school other than itself - Great Falls and Great Falls has it's own LLIV program and it's under-enrolled. It's pretty easy to solve Colvin Run's issues without involving the entire county.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ and I have never seen anyone call all GE kids brats. I did see someone say that maybe the CR mom's kids were brats. Now, I personally think that's not called for, because I don't believe in dragging kids into the adults' disputes (unlike one or more of the GE parents on this forum). But I can see how the PP was provoked and understand the urge to push back.

I'm pretty sure that our kids don't care about these disputes as much as we do and they are the ones who are experiencing school first hand. Man, if only our kids can actually see what goes down in here, I wonder what they would think.

+1. 9:59 and 22:56 are Exhibits A and B in cringe-inducing behavior.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At most middle schools in the county, there will be about 20% in AAP, 80% gen ed. There are exception. For example, Luther Jackson is about 50% AAP, but that is because they are the only center that serves Madison, and possibly Oakton. When they finish the renovations at thoreau, The madison students will probably go to Thoreau.

Here is the problem: you, the sanctimonious one, are failing to look at the big picture. THIS IS TEMPORARY. The Louise Archer kids that made AAP so big at CR will not be at the same middle school; they will go to Luther Jackson, Thoreau or Kilmer.

As for your attitude, your selfishness truly amazes me. I mean, you chose to live in Colvin Run, which has been an AAP center for quite a while (maybe since it was built?).

Because your brat, I mean snowflake did not get in to AAP, you want to torch a system that works. Maybe the problem is your kid

Thank you for demonstrating just how ugly and self-serving the typical AAP parent is. Wow.

Not the PP, but really? Because the crazy CR mom has called AAP parents selfish, and said that AAP kids are snowflakes, brats, and all that is wrong with the AAP system. Pretty much on every thread on a daily basis. Most AAP posters are just too restrained/ nice to fight back, or say what we are all thinking, which is that you think your child should have been selected for AAP, are are pissed that s/he was not. Otherwise, you would confine your posts to the issues at your school-- in relevant threads, rather than attacking everything and everyone associated with AAP in every thread. And really, people who act like this take a lot of sympathy away from your legitimate concerns about legitimate problems, like the situation in the 6th grade at CR.

Again: WHO ARE YOU TALKING TO? FFS. There are several parents from Colvin Run who post here, not just one. You seem to be addressing all your posts to this one person. My kids don't even go to CR (they unfortunately attend another center), but I agree with every word these people have to say. I haven't seen anyone call AAP kids brats, but I sure did see the recent post calling GE kids brats. Seems that's ok by you. And to say that "most AAP posters are just too restrained/nice to fight back" was hysterical. Some of the nastiest posters on DCUM are the AAP parents right here on this forum.

As for me, I'm not at all upset that my child wasn't selected for AAP. I never assumed s/he would be, so that wasn't an issue. The issue arises when the GE classes are depleted because of pushy parents clamoring, appealing, and WISC-ing their kids into AAP.

The problem I and other parents have with AAP is the entitlement mentality that so many parents involved with this program have. If this were a private school, no problem. But as it's a public school system, many of us are fed up with this one program taking up so much bandwidth. And by the way: the thread title is "One Compelling Reason Centers Need to Go," so those anti-center posts you're talking about are perfectly relevant here. I can think of far more than one reason and I'm not going to be intimidated by you or anyone else into keeping quiet about it. The basic reasons centers need to go have to do with all centers, not just CR.

1. How exactly do you know that more than one CR parent posts on an anonymous Internet forum, especially if Your kids don't go there? Are you Jeff?

2. 17% of the kids in AAP don't "deplete" anything.

3. You clearly aren't reading a large portion of the posts, because there are indeed one or more GE parents who don't constructively criticize, but are just nasty about the AAP program, the AAP parents, and, yes, the AAP kids.

1. I know that more than one CR parent posts here because I'm friends with two of them, and I know which posts are theirs and obviously which posts are mine. Therefore, the other posts are written by other people. Get it? I know it's difficult to comprehend that more than one person isn't aboard the AAP center fan club train, but it's true.

2. 17% (more is actually likely) when compounded into a center school create a ginormous imbalance between the few GE classes and the many AAP. And because this thread is about centers, the center environment is what I'm referring to. Not a typical base school.

3. I've read every one of these posts, though I don't chime in often. There are absolutely some ugly comments written by AAP parents about GE kids. Please don't pretend it's only GE parents.

Even more reason why I feel like I should disqualify a lot of the anti-AAP comments. I just really feel like Langley is their own little bubble and doesn't speak for FCPS as a whole. So if they want to do something different for their pyramid because of the huge numbers of AAP students which FCPS has also agreed to, go right ahead, but don't drag down the rest of FCPS with you. You don't speak for all of FCPS.

You should disqualify a lot of the anti-AAP comments? Because you fancy yourself the arbiter of what is and isn't acceptable on these forums? Umm... I think not.