Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.
I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.
Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.
b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.
Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.
So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?
How smart does one have to be in order to learn grade extensions that are only one level above?
Learning only one grade level above doesn't sound like a gifted program to me. What is all of the excitement about?
+1.
It's not a gifted program.
What? Not a gifted program! Then why are some of these AAP parents going Ape Crazy about a program that arguably many kids within "all demographics" can be successful in? Maybe because they have invested so much time, money, blood, sweat and tears into getting their DC into this program only to find out that it isn't what they thought is was going to be...most AAP kids will be tracked to AP or IB classes right along with the other GE kids by the time they are in HS. The only advantage AAP gives some kids is in Math (Algebra 1 Honors in the 7th grade); otherwise, they can take the exact same classes in HS...right?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.
I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.
Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.
b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.
Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.
So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?
How smart does one have to be in order to learn grade extensions that are only one level above?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.
Everyone in America most certainly does not start at the same starting line. Babies are born to families with all sorts of advantages and disadvantages. A child born to parents that are educated and emphasize education to their children is standing at a starting line that is miles ahead of the child born to parents without a college education and that child is miles ahead of the child born to parents in deep poverty or with mental health issues. Is the child born to educated parents somehow more valuable and more worthy of a challenging education because of an accident of birth?
Public education can never totally compensate for deficits in every child's family situation, but I believe it should provide opportunities and do its best to enable all kids to reach their potential.
Right. So we should lower standards so that kids from "disadvantaged" backgrounds could compete? Wouldn't this approach be a disservice to these kids?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The way AAP is currently being implemented (through grade level extensions) probably underserving many gifted kids...and many kids that can do the work but don't get in are being underserved by GE...I would like to know the reasons why some AAP parents are against AAP for all.
Easy. Kids with best test scores = most qualified. Just so happens that most kids who test well are white and asian. If minority kids can't cut it, then they just can't. They need to work harder to make the cut.
We all take the same tests, and are taught the same material. We all start at the same starting line. The argument of "societal disadvantages" is nebulous at best and unsolvable.
Maybe reading isn't your strength...but you didn't answer the original question...Why are you "against" AAP for all?
Its a ridiculous question. AAP is for all. There are no rules that purposely restrict certain people.
And you are being purposely obtuse.![]()
Anonymous wrote:Blah blah blah blah blah
It is not a Gifted program because my 1st grader couldn't take Mandarin 7 as it conflicted with Matrix Algebra
Blah blah blah blah blah
AP needs to start in Kindergarten so my snowflake could take AP World History and make room for electives in 2nd grade
Blah blah blah blah blah
When can my 1st grader submit the Common App for MIT?
Anonymous wrote:What? Not a gifted program! Then why are some of these AAP parents going Ape Crazy about a program that arguably many kids within "all demographics" can be successful in? Maybe because they have invested so much time, money, blood, sweat and tears into getting their DC into this program only to find out that it isn't what they thought is was going to be...most AAP kids will be tracked to AP or IB classes right along with the other GE kids by the time they are in HS. The only advantage AAP gives some kids is in Math (Algebra 1 Honors in the 7th grade); otherwise, they can take the exact same classes in HS...right?
This thread became low comedy pages ago. Having driven everyone else off, the usual cast of haters now has taken to cringe-worthy simulated debate.
It was not much of a topic to begin with, but anyone who really wishes to discuss AAP demographics needs to start a new thread. This one is no longer fit for consumption.
What? Not a gifted program! Then why are some of these AAP parents going Ape Crazy about a program that arguably many kids within "all demographics" can be successful in? Maybe because they have invested so much time, money, blood, sweat and tears into getting their DC into this program only to find out that it isn't what they thought is was going to be...most AAP kids will be tracked to AP or IB classes right along with the other GE kids by the time they are in HS. The only advantage AAP gives some kids is in Math (Algebra 1 Honors in the 7th grade); otherwise, they can take the exact same classes in HS...right?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.
I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.
Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.
b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.
Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.
So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?
How smart does one have to be in order to learn grade extensions that are only one level above?
Learning only one grade level above doesn't sound like a gifted program to me. What is all of the excitement about?
+1.
It's not a gifted program.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.
Everyone in America most certainly does not start at the same starting line. Babies are born to families with all sorts of advantages and disadvantages. A child born to parents that are educated and emphasize education to their children is standing at a starting line that is miles ahead of the child born to parents without a college education and that child is miles ahead of the child born to parents in deep poverty or with mental health issues. Is the child born to educated parents somehow more valuable and more worthy of a challenging education because of an accident of birth?
Public education can never totally compensate for deficits in every child's family situation, but I believe it should provide opportunities and do its best to enable all kids to reach their potential.
Right. So we should lower standards so that kids from "disadvantaged" backgrounds could compete? Wouldn't this approach be a disservice to these kids?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.
I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.
Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.
b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.
Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.
So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?
How smart does one have to be in order to learn grade extensions that are only one level above?
Learning only one grade level above doesn't sound like a gifted program to me. What is all of the excitement about?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.
I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.
Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.
b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.
Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.
So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?
How smart does one have to be in order to learn grade extensions that are only one level above?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Want to hear thoughts, from all perspectives.
I keep hearing that certain groups are under-represented in AAP. The question is whether FCPS should ensure the AAP population mirrors the overall FCPS student population, by percentages of race, gender, background, etc.
Nope, it shouldn't. That's the essence of meritocracy -- to measure things objectively, using exactly same standards for all.
b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.
Not everyone starts at the same starting line. Sad but true.
So how much do you want to compensate for that to make things "fair"? With the CoGAT would it be 10 points? 20?
Anonymous wrote:b/c everyone is given the exact same chance in society. This is America. Everyone starts at the same starting line. So these standards valid b/c we are measuring everyone apples to apples essentially.
Everyone in America most certainly does not start at the same starting line. Babies are born to families with all sorts of advantages and disadvantages. A child born to parents that are educated and emphasize education to their children is standing at a starting line that is miles ahead of the child born to parents without a college education and that child is miles ahead of the child born to parents in deep poverty or with mental health issues. Is the child born to educated parents somehow more valuable and more worthy of a challenging education because of an accident of birth?
Public education can never totally compensate for deficits in every child's family situation, but I believe it should provide opportunities and do its best to enable all kids to reach their potential.