FWIW, my kids in AAP was completely average in the General Education program. Honestly, they were telling me she was below grade level (which I knew was wrong). We really had begun to assume we were just nutty parents thinking she was bright and that she was of average intelligence -- until her test scores came. Then, in the AAP center, she has done incredibly well. So there's something to it. There's something they do at the center that they weren't doing at the base school. I agree with the teacher above, though, that there are many students who probably didn't score as well on the stupid tests who would also benefit front eh learning style at the center. Isn't that the point of rolling out the "AAP curriculum" to all of the students like they are doing in McLean?

My take on GT is somewhat different. Some of the GT kids will get bored in a slower-paced classroom. Those those kids will either stop paying attention, or get into trouble (or both). At a faster and/or more in-depth pace, they will be more engaged in the classroom.

Trouble making kids hurt all students

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended 6-7 non-GT classes in Fairfax county over many years in the GT program. Put bluntly, the non-GT classes were terrible. Kids not paying attention, teachers dealing with discipline issues rather than academics, or helping along student who didn't bother to do their homework. Very little writing and analysis expected, and no public speaking opportunities even attempted. I felt like I was at a different school from by regular GT classes.

[list]See FCPS DISCRIMINATION!!! Why do the kids who can perform at A level in their ASSIGNED schools get these opportunities?? This is absolutely discrimination for one child who is smart to be brought down the the above described level while others are given unprecedented opportunities.

I really agree with this. I saw the same as a teacher. I thought it was unfair that some students go wonderful opportunities for learning and enrichment while others languished in disruptive classrooms. The GT program will insist that all these gt identified kids actually have a completely different learning style and that other, "normal" kids cannot benefit from that type of instruction. However, there is really no scientific evidence for this idea, especially the way the programs are actually implemented. It's more of a political justification adhered to for budgetary reasons.

would you explain what you mean byt this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended 6-7 non-GT classes in Fairfax county over many years in the GT program. Put bluntly, the non-GT classes were terrible. Kids not paying attention, teachers dealing with discipline issues rather than academics, or helping along student who didn't bother to do their homework. Very little writing and analysis expected, and no public speaking opportunities even attempted. I felt like I was at a different school from by regular GT classes.

[list]See FCPS DISCRIMINATION!!! Why do the kids who can perform at A level in their ASSIGNED schools get these opportunities?? This is absolutely discrimination for one child who is smart to be brought down the the above described level while others are given unprecedented opportunities.

I really agree with this. I saw the same as a teacher. I thought it was unfair that some students go wonderful opportunities for learning and enrichment while others languished in disruptive classrooms. The GT program will insist that all these gt identified kids actually have a completely different learning style and that other, "normal" kids cannot benefit from that type of instruction. However, there is really no scientific evidence for this idea, especially the way the programs are actually implemented. It's more of a political justification adhered to for budgetary reasons.

Human beings generally seek environments (to optimise sensory stimulation --visual, tactile, smell, vocal, auditory) for the best outcomes (gifted and magnet programs, excellent wine, restaurants, museums, theatres, cinema, cars, clothes and rock concerts)

Outcome measures may be financial, recreational, entertaining and educational.

In the case of gifted programs, desires include "better" or "more" resources (teachers, teaching materials and content) and peer group.

Not many people obsess over getting into poorly performing schools or restaurants.

OP here. After starting this thread I reported myself and asked Jeff to delete my post because I thought maybe I shouldn't open this can of worms. It's amazing how many responses and views this has gotten.

I'm thinking AAP must vary and in some areas perhaps an advanced child won't get what they need in the regular classroom. From what I've heard where I live (good schools in FCPS) the kids get plenty in the regular classroom, though if you talk to parents where I live set on AAP, they would disagree.

My situation with my older child is different from most of yours in that he is learning disabled in the language domain, but gifted in the quantitative domain. The discrepancy between the two areas is vast. Maybe if he were gifted accross the board i would see things differently. I'm actually just grateful he has an area of academics he loves where he excels and it's all self-motivated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended 6-7 non-GT classes in Fairfax county over many years in the GT program. Put bluntly, the non-GT classes were terrible. Kids not paying attention, teachers dealing with discipline issues rather than academics, or helping along student who didn't bother to do their homework. Very little writing and analysis expected, and no public speaking opportunities even attempted. I felt like I was at a different school from by regular GT classes.

[list]See FCPS DISCRIMINATION!!! Why do the kids who can perform at A level in their ASSIGNED schools get these opportunities?? This is absolutely discrimination for one child who is smart to be brought down the the above described level while others are given unprecedented opportunities.

[list]that would be: Why do the kids who can perform at A level in their ASSIGNED schools NOT get these opportunities??

um .... because it's not based on grades? A lot of these grades these days for certain groups are given to bolster self-esteem. Then they are shocked, shocked when they flunk ougt later on because they were "A" students/

Anonymous wrote:[list]that would be: Why do the kids who can perform at A level in their ASSIGNED schools NOT get these opportunities??

But they do.

Some good consumer information about test prep companies:


http://www.smartmoney.com/borrow/student-loans/10-things-testprep-services-wont-tell-you-1301943701454/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended 6-7 non-GT classes in Fairfax county over many years in the GT program. Put bluntly, the non-GT classes were terrible. Kids not paying attention, teachers dealing with discipline issues rather than academics, or helping along student who didn't bother to do their homework. Very little writing and analysis expected, and no public speaking opportunities even attempted. I felt like I was at a different school from by regular GT classes.

[list]See FCPS DISCRIMINATION!!! Why do the kids who can perform at A level in their ASSIGNED schools get these opportunities?? This is absolutely discrimination for one child who is smart to be brought down the the above described level while others are given unprecedented opportunities.

[list]that would be: Why do the kids who can perform at A level in their ASSIGNED schools NOT get these opportunities??

Anonymous wrote:I attended 6-7 non-GT classes in Fairfax county over many years in the GT program. Put bluntly, the non-GT classes were terrible. Kids not paying attention, teachers dealing with discipline issues rather than academics, or helping along student who didn't bother to do their homework. Very little writing and analysis expected, and no public speaking opportunities even attempted. I felt like I was at a different school from by regular GT classes.

[list]See FCPS DISCRIMINATION!!! Why do the kids who can perform at A level in their ASSIGNED schools get these opportunities?? This is absolutely discrimination for one child who is smart to be brought down the the above described level while others are given unprecedented opportunities.

Anonymous wrote:You are confusing study and preparation for a task or career with standardized "test prep." We are talking about the latter, not the former here.
"Test prep" companies have a very defined purpose. If you are not familiar with them, take a look at a few of their websites. They provide coaching for very specific standardized tests. And they charge a lot of money for this coaching. If your child has been studying and working hard at a wide variety of educational activities, there should be no need for this type of extensive coaching to take a standardized test. I contend they'd be better off reading a wide variety of good books from the public library.

If preparation for standardized test is unethical, then we should all discourage our kids from preparing for PSAT, SAT, AP, GRE (all standardized tests) ... If students are not able to pass these exams without preparation, they are not worthy of pursuing advanced studies? Further, top math and science students in the U.S. (and all other countries, I am sure) spend countless days and hours preparing for various international competitions such as Math Olympiad. Well, if these kids are really smart and know their stuff why do they need to prepare? Let them all compete, if they wish, without prior preparation. Let's disqualify them if they do any prep work.

You are confusing study and preparation for a task or career with standardized "test prep." We are talking about the latter, not the former here.
"Test prep" companies have a very defined purpose. If you are not familiar with them, take a look at a few of their websites. They provide coaching for very specific standardized tests. And they charge a lot of money for this coaching. If your child has been studying and working hard at a wide variety of educational activities, there should be no need for this type of extensive coaching to take a standardized test. I contend they'd be better off reading a wide variety of good books from the public library.

NIH poster. I feel like we've been through this before. But, please try to be a good member of the community. Cut down on the sock puppeting, if not completely eliminating it.

...But in the public school GT testing system, that one test carries extraordinary weight, so the system can be inappropriately gamed by some unscrupulous parent who wants to prep her child for the test, even though the child lacks the overall academic skills to match that test score.

Unsubstantiated and speculative nonsense.

Tell that to all others that prepare for tests (pilots, surgeons, athletes, musicians) you really don't belong on the platform because they scored and performed too well on the last test. Hilarious!

Where is the data? Who really does belongs on the podium? Entitlement children with the advantages of SES and tutors who do not perform as well, or are defeated on the pitch!!

What happened to rugged American individualism and competition that was the original intent of the framers of our constitution?
Who will establish the real definition of test prep? When does test prep begin and end (in utero, at birth, a week before the test, the night before, after the "practise" test)? What is test prep? (e.g., tutors, teachers paid to teach to the test, prep parlors at home or outside the home, private school test prep) Everyone seems to have their own definition of test prep or what constitutes test prep? Should children punch a clock to track the amount of time utilised for "test prep" so dcum rodents can keep track?

The discussion is inane. Preparation is ethical and should be encouraged (in the classroom, at work, on the job, on the athletic fields). What is the rational for forbidden preparation (if at all possible) in school of all places! Is everyone afraid of a high bar and competition in our land. Our politicians and leaders extoll the virtue of competition. Is this wrong?