Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone would say that being in an AAP center program is a bad thing for a student who is identified as gifted, via the usual tests and observation.

I don't think anyone would say that special programs are a bad thing for kids with learning disabilities, autism, or who don't speak much English.

So leave those programs alone, as they are doing the job in helping meet those students' needs.

Change your focus to the kids in gen ed who desperately need the attention and more differentiation and more challenging work. Stop trying to blame the one program you can blame and still feel PC. It's misguided.

This is a great point. ELL has to have as many kids as AAP, and certainly makes huge demands on the resources. Special Ed is smaller, but again, is very resource intensive. AAP cost nothing extra except busing. And certainly there is an argument to be made that it brings in tax dollars that more than offset it's cost if parents and business move here, instead of MD, Alington, DC, Loudon, PW County, etc because of AAP. As the Arlington vs FCPS NMSF debate on the other thread (why is FCPS so much more successful than Arlington at having kids get NMSFs?). AAP also creates a successful pipeline to TJ and produces students who make the whole school system look good. Nevertheless, it's the program GE parents want to target-- because it looks bad to gripe about Special Ed and ELL. And because they aren't jealous of the kids in Special Ed and ELL.

Uh, no. The reason AAP is such a target is because ALL taxpayers are funding this program, but unlike Special Ed, most kids admitted to AAP are not gifted and don't need special services. No one is arguing that we need to do away with programs like Special Ed - obviously, there's a tremendous need for those kids to receive services. Taxpayers are happy to help. What we're not happy to do, however, is spend money on frivolous programs for enormous groups of mostly average kids who don't need special intervention at all. In fact, that "enrichment" we're paying for could easily benefit ALL kids, but isn't. If calling inequity "jealousy" makes you feel better, then so be it. But as long as we're all footing the bill for your kid's extra (and unnecessary) enrichment, expect some push back by those of us who realize this is a PUBLIC school system, not an exclusive private school within a school for some but not all.

oh well! Get over it, it's not going anywhere. Thank God!

Glad you're appreciative of my tax dollars benefitting your child.

NP here - Oh please...if your child was in it, you'd not say a peep.

And if your child wasn't, but was virtually identical in ability to those who were, you'd be singing a different tune.

But you have no idea unless you live with the child and know their IQ, work samples, letters of recommendation, NNAT and CogAt scores. My kid is 2E and introverted and shy. No one who meets her is blown away by her. She's practically mute. Her GBRS in 3rd grade was low (8) because even her teacher was not impressed with her.

She scored in the 140s on the NNAT and CogAT and we got her IQ tested when we did a neuropsych exam. She scored a 151. We didn't even believe it. Nothing about her screamed gifted at the time. Even now I KNOW there are people who wonder why she was admitted to AAP, but you know who doesn't wonder, her AAP teachers and us now that we see the level of work she is capable of handling. We had a Woodcock Johnson abilities test done on her and she scored several grades above 3rd grade. Again, we had no idea because she was so quiet and never really ask to be pushed or showed she needed to be pushed. She's in 5th grade now. Been at a center for 2 years and she is doing great and even come out of her shell a tiny bit. Her teachers rave about her work but still comment on her needing to self advocate more and participate more, but if someone saw her and then looked at their precocious little star, they'd think, "they let her in and not my Larla? They let everyone in who isn't even gifted." She's probably the kid 1/2 of you think doesn't belong.

NP here. No. She sounds like a kid I'd expect to be in a gifted program. Quietly brilliant. Not a people-pleasing above average child whose parents brag about how she has all 4's on her second grade report card and still get her tutors to keep up with AAP work that would be a breeze to a child like yours.

Nailed it. This description sums up most of the kids in AAP at our center school.

Oh dear Lord...again the ridiculous overexaggertion. Our center is our base so we've been there for 6 years. How can YOU know that most AAP kids at your center are tutored? I know of literally zero.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone would say that being in an AAP center program is a bad thing for a student who is identified as gifted, via the usual tests and observation.

I don't think anyone would say that special programs are a bad thing for kids with learning disabilities, autism, or who don't speak much English.

So leave those programs alone, as they are doing the job in helping meet those students' needs.

Change your focus to the kids in gen ed who desperately need the attention and more differentiation and more challenging work. Stop trying to blame the one program you can blame and still feel PC. It's misguided.

This is a great point. ELL has to have as many kids as AAP, and certainly makes huge demands on the resources. Special Ed is smaller, but again, is very resource intensive. AAP cost nothing extra except busing. And certainly there is an argument to be made that it brings in tax dollars that more than offset it's cost if parents and business move here, instead of MD, Alington, DC, Loudon, PW County, etc because of AAP. As the Arlington vs FCPS NMSF debate on the other thread (why is FCPS so much more successful than Arlington at having kids get NMSFs?). AAP also creates a successful pipeline to TJ and produces students who make the whole school system look good. Nevertheless, it's the program GE parents want to target-- because it looks bad to gripe about Special Ed and ELL. And because they aren't jealous of the kids in Special Ed and ELL.

Uh, no. The reason AAP is such a target is because ALL taxpayers are funding this program, but unlike Special Ed, most kids admitted to AAP are not gifted and don't need special services. No one is arguing that we need to do away with programs like Special Ed - obviously, there's a tremendous need for those kids to receive services. Taxpayers are happy to help. What we're not happy to do, however, is spend money on frivolous programs for enormous groups of mostly average kids who don't need special intervention at all. In fact, that "enrichment" we're paying for could easily benefit ALL kids, but isn't. If calling inequity "jealousy" makes you feel better, then so be it. But as long as we're all footing the bill for your kid's extra (and unnecessary) enrichment, expect some push back by those of us who realize this is a PUBLIC school system, not an exclusive private school within a school for some but not all.

oh well! Get over it, it's not going anywhere. Thank God!

Glad you're appreciative of my tax dollars benefitting your child.

NP here - Oh please...if your child was in it, you'd not say a peep.

And if your child wasn't, but was virtually identical in ability to those who were, you'd be singing a different tune.

But you have no idea unless you live with the child and know their IQ, work samples, letters of recommendation, NNAT and CogAt scores. My kid is 2E and introverted and shy. No one who meets her is blown away by her. She's practically mute. Her GBRS in 3rd grade was low (8) because even her teacher was not impressed with her.

She scored in the 140s on the NNAT and CogAT and we got her IQ tested when we did a neuropsych exam. She scored a 151. We didn't even believe it. Nothing about her screamed gifted at the time. Even now I KNOW there are people who wonder why she was admitted to AAP, but you know who doesn't wonder, her AAP teachers and us now that we see the level of work she is capable of handling. We had a Woodcock Johnson abilities test done on her and she scored several grades above 3rd grade. Again, we had no idea because she was so quiet and never really ask to be pushed or showed she needed to be pushed. She's in 5th grade now. Been at a center for 2 years and she is doing great and even come out of her shell a tiny bit. Her teachers rave about her work but still comment on her needing to self advocate more and participate more, but if someone saw her and then looked at their precocious little star, they'd think, "they let her in and not my Larla? They let everyone in who isn't even gifted." She's probably the kid 1/2 of you think doesn't belong.

NP here. No. She sounds like a kid I'd expect to be in a gifted program. Quietly brilliant. Not a people-pleasing above average child whose parents brag about how she has all 4's on her second grade report card and still get her tutors to keep up with AAP work that would be a breeze to a child like yours.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone would say that being in an AAP center program is a bad thing for a student who is identified as gifted, via the usual tests and observation.

I don't think anyone would say that special programs are a bad thing for kids with learning disabilities, autism, or who don't speak much English.

So leave those programs alone, as they are doing the job in helping meet those students' needs.

Change your focus to the kids in gen ed who desperately need the attention and more differentiation and more challenging work. Stop trying to blame the one program you can blame and still feel PC. It's misguided.

This is a great point. ELL has to have as many kids as AAP, and certainly makes huge demands on the resources. Special Ed is smaller, but again, is very resource intensive. AAP cost nothing extra except busing. And certainly there is an argument to be made that it brings in tax dollars that more than offset it's cost if parents and business move here, instead of MD, Alington, DC, Loudon, PW County, etc because of AAP. As the Arlington vs FCPS NMSF debate on the other thread (why is FCPS so much more successful than Arlington at having kids get NMSFs?). AAP also creates a successful pipeline to TJ and produces students who make the whole school system look good. Nevertheless, it's the program GE parents want to target-- because it looks bad to gripe about Special Ed and ELL. And because they aren't jealous of the kids in Special Ed and ELL.

Uh, no. The reason AAP is such a target is because ALL taxpayers are funding this program, but unlike Special Ed, most kids admitted to AAP are not gifted and don't need special services. No one is arguing that we need to do away with programs like Special Ed - obviously, there's a tremendous need for those kids to receive services. Taxpayers are happy to help. What we're not happy to do, however, is spend money on frivolous programs for enormous groups of mostly average kids who don't need special intervention at all. In fact, that "enrichment" we're paying for could easily benefit ALL kids, but isn't. If calling inequity "jealousy" makes you feel better, then so be it. But as long as we're all footing the bill for your kid's extra (and unnecessary) enrichment, expect some push back by those of us who realize this is a PUBLIC school system, not an exclusive private school within a school for some but not all.

oh well! Get over it, it's not going anywhere. Thank God!

Glad you're appreciative of my tax dollars benefitting your child.

NP here - Oh please...if your child was in it, you'd not say a peep.

And if your child wasn't, but was virtually identical in ability to those who were, you'd be singing a different tune.

But you have no idea unless you live with the child and know their IQ, work samples, letters of recommendation, NNAT and CogAt scores. My kid is 2E and introverted and shy. No one who meets her is blown away by her. She's practically mute. Her GBRS in 3rd grade was low (8) because even her teacher was not impressed with her.

She scored in the 140s on the NNAT and CogAT and we got her IQ tested when we did a neuropsych exam. She scored a 151. We didn't even believe it. Nothing about her screamed gifted at the time. Even now I KNOW there are people who wonder why she was admitted to AAP, but you know who doesn't wonder, her AAP teachers and us now that we see the level of work she is capable of handling. We had a Woodcock Johnson abilities test done on her and she scored several grades above 3rd grade. Again, we had no idea because she was so quiet and never really ask to be pushed or showed she needed to be pushed. She's in 5th grade now. Been at a center for 2 years and she is doing great and even come out of her shell a tiny bit. Her teachers rave about her work but still comment on her needing to self advocate more and participate more, but if someone saw her and then looked at their precocious little star, they'd think, "they let her in and not my Larla? They let everyone in who isn't even gifted." She's probably the kid 1/2 of you think doesn't belong.

NP here. No. She sounds like a kid I'd expect to be in a gifted program. Quietly brilliant. Not a people-pleasing above average child whose parents brag about how she has all 4's on her second grade report card and still get her tutors to keep up with AAP work that would be a breeze to a child like yours.

Nailed it. This description sums up most of the kids in AAP at our center school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone would say that being in an AAP center program is a bad thing for a student who is identified as gifted, via the usual tests and observation.

I don't think anyone would say that special programs are a bad thing for kids with learning disabilities, autism, or who don't speak much English.

So leave those programs alone, as they are doing the job in helping meet those students' needs.

Change your focus to the kids in gen ed who desperately need the attention and more differentiation and more challenging work. Stop trying to blame the one program you can blame and still feel PC. It's misguided.

This is a great point. ELL has to have as many kids as AAP, and certainly makes huge demands on the resources. Special Ed is smaller, but again, is very resource intensive. AAP cost nothing extra except busing. And certainly there is an argument to be made that it brings in tax dollars that more than offset it's cost if parents and business move here, instead of MD, Alington, DC, Loudon, PW County, etc because of AAP. As the Arlington vs FCPS NMSF debate on the other thread (why is FCPS so much more successful than Arlington at having kids get NMSFs?). AAP also creates a successful pipeline to TJ and produces students who make the whole school system look good. Nevertheless, it's the program GE parents want to target-- because it looks bad to gripe about Special Ed and ELL. And because they aren't jealous of the kids in Special Ed and ELL.

Uh, no. The reason AAP is such a target is because ALL taxpayers are funding this program, but unlike Special Ed, most kids admitted to AAP are not gifted and don't need special services. No one is arguing that we need to do away with programs like Special Ed - obviously, there's a tremendous need for those kids to receive services. Taxpayers are happy to help. What we're not happy to do, however, is spend money on frivolous programs for enormous groups of mostly average kids who don't need special intervention at all. In fact, that "enrichment" we're paying for could easily benefit ALL kids, but isn't. If calling inequity "jealousy" makes you feel better, then so be it. But as long as we're all footing the bill for your kid's extra (and unnecessary) enrichment, expect some push back by those of us who realize this is a PUBLIC school system, not an exclusive private school within a school for some but not all.

oh well! Get over it, it's not going anywhere. Thank God!

Glad you're appreciative of my tax dollars benefitting your child.

NP here - Oh please...if your child was in it, you'd not say a peep.

And if your child wasn't, but was virtually identical in ability to those who were, you'd be singing a different tune.

But you have no idea unless you live with the child and know their IQ, work samples, letters of recommendation, NNAT and CogAt scores. My kid is 2E and introverted and shy. No one who meets her is blown away by her. She's practically mute. Her GBRS in 3rd grade was low (8) because even her teacher was not impressed with her.

She scored in the 140s on the NNAT and CogAT and we got her IQ tested when we did a neuropsych exam. She scored a 151. We didn't even believe it. Nothing about her screamed gifted at the time. Even now I KNOW there are people who wonder why she was admitted to AAP, but you know who doesn't wonder, her AAP teachers and us now that we see the level of work she is capable of handling. We had a Woodcock Johnson abilities test done on her and she scored several grades above 3rd grade. Again, we had no idea because she was so quiet and never really ask to be pushed or showed she needed to be pushed. She's in 5th grade now. Been at a center for 2 years and she is doing great and even come out of her shell a tiny bit. Her teachers rave about her work but still comment on her needing to self advocate more and participate more, but if someone saw her and then looked at their precocious little star, they'd think, "they let her in and not my Larla? They let everyone in who isn't even gifted." She's probably the kid 1/2 of you think doesn't belong.

NP here. No. She sounds like a kid I'd expect to be in a gifted program. Quietly brilliant. Not a people-pleasing above average child whose parents brag about how she has all 4's on her second grade report card and still get her tutors to keep up with AAP work that would be a breeze to a child like yours.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone would say that being in an AAP center program is a bad thing for a student who is identified as gifted, via the usual tests and observation.

I don't think anyone would say that special programs are a bad thing for kids with learning disabilities, autism, or who don't speak much English.

So leave those programs alone, as they are doing the job in helping meet those students' needs.

Change your focus to the kids in gen ed who desperately need the attention and more differentiation and more challenging work. Stop trying to blame the one program you can blame and still feel PC. It's misguided.

This is a great point. ELL has to have as many kids as AAP, and certainly makes huge demands on the resources. Special Ed is smaller, but again, is very resource intensive. AAP cost nothing extra except busing. And certainly there is an argument to be made that it brings in tax dollars that more than offset it's cost if parents and business move here, instead of MD, Alington, DC, Loudon, PW County, etc because of AAP. As the Arlington vs FCPS NMSF debate on the other thread (why is FCPS so much more successful than Arlington at having kids get NMSFs?). AAP also creates a successful pipeline to TJ and produces students who make the whole school system look good. Nevertheless, it's the program GE parents want to target-- because it looks bad to gripe about Special Ed and ELL. And because they aren't jealous of the kids in Special Ed and ELL.

Uh, no. The reason AAP is such a target is because ALL taxpayers are funding this program, but unlike Special Ed, most kids admitted to AAP are not gifted and don't need special services. No one is arguing that we need to do away with programs like Special Ed - obviously, there's a tremendous need for those kids to receive services. Taxpayers are happy to help. What we're not happy to do, however, is spend money on frivolous programs for enormous groups of mostly average kids who don't need special intervention at all. In fact, that "enrichment" we're paying for could easily benefit ALL kids, but isn't. If calling inequity "jealousy" makes you feel better, then so be it. But as long as we're all footing the bill for your kid's extra (and unnecessary) enrichment, expect some push back by those of us who realize this is a PUBLIC school system, not an exclusive private school within a school for some but not all.

oh well! Get over it, it's not going anywhere. Thank God!

Glad you're appreciative of my tax dollars benefitting your child.

NP here - Oh please...if your child was in it, you'd not say a peep.

And if your child wasn't, but was virtually identical in ability to those who were, you'd be singing a different tune.

But you have no idea unless you live with the child and know their IQ, work samples, letters of recommendation, NNAT and CogAt scores. My kid is 2E and introverted and shy. No one who meets her is blown away by her. She's practically mute. Her GBRS in 3rd grade was low (8) because even her teacher was not impressed with her.

She scored in the 140s on the NNAT and CogAT and we got her IQ tested when we did a neuropsych exam. She scored a 151. We didn't even believe it. Nothing about her screamed gifted at the time. Even now I KNOW there are people who wonder why she was admitted to AAP, but you know who doesn't wonder, her AAP teachers and us now that we see the level of work she is capable of handling. We had a Woodcock Johnson abilities test done on her and she scored several grades above 3rd grade. Again, we had no idea because she was so quiet and never really ask to be pushed or showed she needed to be pushed. She's in 5th grade now. Been at a center for 2 years and she is doing great and even come out of her shell a tiny bit. Her teachers rave about her work but still comment on her needing to self advocate more and participate more, but if someone saw her and then looked at their precocious little star, they'd think, "they let her in and not my Larla? They let everyone in who isn't even gifted." She's probably the kid 1/2 of you think doesn't belong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone would say that being in an AAP center program is a bad thing for a student who is identified as gifted, via the usual tests and observation.

I don't think anyone would say that special programs are a bad thing for kids with learning disabilities, autism, or who don't speak much English.

So leave those programs alone, as they are doing the job in helping meet those students' needs.

Change your focus to the kids in gen ed who desperately need the attention and more differentiation and more challenging work. Stop trying to blame the one program you can blame and still feel PC. It's misguided.

This is a great point. ELL has to have as many kids as AAP, and certainly makes huge demands on the resources. Special Ed is smaller, but again, is very resource intensive. AAP cost nothing extra except busing. And certainly there is an argument to be made that it brings in tax dollars that more than offset it's cost if parents and business move here, instead of MD, Alington, DC, Loudon, PW County, etc because of AAP. As the Arlington vs FCPS NMSF debate on the other thread (why is FCPS so much more successful than Arlington at having kids get NMSFs?). AAP also creates a successful pipeline to TJ and produces students who make the whole school system look good. Nevertheless, it's the program GE parents want to target-- because it looks bad to gripe about Special Ed and ELL. And because they aren't jealous of the kids in Special Ed and ELL.

Uh, no. The reason AAP is such a target is because ALL taxpayers are funding this program, but unlike Special Ed, most kids admitted to AAP are not gifted and don't need special services. No one is arguing that we need to do away with programs like Special Ed - obviously, there's a tremendous need for those kids to receive services. Taxpayers are happy to help. What we're not happy to do, however, is spend money on frivolous programs for enormous groups of mostly average kids who don't need special intervention at all. In fact, that "enrichment" we're paying for could easily benefit ALL kids, but isn't. If calling inequity "jealousy" makes you feel better, then so be it. But as long as we're all footing the bill for your kid's extra (and unnecessary) enrichment, expect some push back by those of us who realize this is a PUBLIC school system, not an exclusive private school within a school for some but not all.

oh well! Get over it, it's not going anywhere. Thank God!

Glad you're appreciative of my tax dollars benefitting your child.

NP here - Oh please...if your child was in it, you'd not say a peep.

And if your child wasn't, but was virtually identical in ability to those who were, you'd be singing a different tune.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a child that just started in the AAP program this year. My initial thoughts are that it is a good program. I like the higher expectations and focus on critical thinking, however I don't think it is all that much of a gifted program. My DC is one of those kids that tests in the highly gifted range but is lazy and will rise to only to whatever expectations are set for the class unless he is interested in the what he is doing. He needs a class that is more in depth and accelerated than what the current AAP program offers.

That said I think the Aap extensions that focus on critical thinking would benefit all kids and should be provided as part of the general education curriculum.
I do think the current program is bloated and clearly includes kids who don't belong in a traditional gifted classroom. I know lots of kids that got in without the requisite test or GBRS scores. I am all for offering the current AAP curriculum as the general education curriculum and reducing the current AAP cohort to the top 2% of FCPS takers and offering a truly accelerated and gifted program. That way the vast majority of kids can benefit from the AAP focus on critical thinking that I think that most generally bright kids can handle.

This is absolutely true and why AAP is so watered down - it can't be a real gifted program, because so few of the kids in it are actually gifted! Instead, it's just a slightly accelerated regular curriculum, that could easily be done by most kids. It boggles the mind why it's considered a "test-in" program, when it could just be open to all. That would allow a REAL gifted program to be developed for exceptionally gifted kids - who are few and far between.

You do know the mom that you are quoting has less than two weeks experience total with AAP. They haven't even had many real assignments or projects yet. She has no idea who is or who is not gifted among her kid's new classmates.

It's irrelevant how long her child has been in AAP, or even if she has a child in AAP. Everything she - and others - have stated about the program is true.

Great! It's true, "AAP lets in too many kids who aren't gifted" and yet YOUR kid still couldn't get in. Now what?

My kid IS in AAP, you dolt. And she's bored silly as it's not even a gifted program.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone would say that being in an AAP center program is a bad thing for a student who is identified as gifted, via the usual tests and observation.

I don't think anyone would say that special programs are a bad thing for kids with learning disabilities, autism, or who don't speak much English.

So leave those programs alone, as they are doing the job in helping meet those students' needs.

Change your focus to the kids in gen ed who desperately need the attention and more differentiation and more challenging work. Stop trying to blame the one program you can blame and still feel PC. It's misguided.

This is a great point. ELL has to have as many kids as AAP, and certainly makes huge demands on the resources. Special Ed is smaller, but again, is very resource intensive. AAP cost nothing extra except busing. And certainly there is an argument to be made that it brings in tax dollars that more than offset it's cost if parents and business move here, instead of MD, Alington, DC, Loudon, PW County, etc because of AAP. As the Arlington vs FCPS NMSF debate on the other thread (why is FCPS so much more successful than Arlington at having kids get NMSFs?). AAP also creates a successful pipeline to TJ and produces students who make the whole school system look good. Nevertheless, it's the program GE parents want to target-- because it looks bad to gripe about Special Ed and ELL. And because they aren't jealous of the kids in Special Ed and ELL.

Uh, no. The reason AAP is such a target is because ALL taxpayers are funding this program, but unlike Special Ed, most kids admitted to AAP are not gifted and don't need special services. No one is arguing that we need to do away with programs like Special Ed - obviously, there's a tremendous need for those kids to receive services. Taxpayers are happy to help. What we're not happy to do, however, is spend money on frivolous programs for enormous groups of mostly average kids who don't need special intervention at all. In fact, that "enrichment" we're paying for could easily benefit ALL kids, but isn't. If calling inequity "jealousy" makes you feel better, then so be it. But as long as we're all footing the bill for your kid's extra (and unnecessary) enrichment, expect some push back by those of us who realize this is a PUBLIC school system, not an exclusive private school within a school for some but not all.

oh well! Get over it, it's not going anywhere. Thank God!

Glad you're appreciative of my tax dollars benefitting your child.

NP here - Oh please...if your child was in it, you'd not say a peep.

And if your child wasn't, but was virtually identical in ability to those who were, you'd be singing a different tune.

I might be doing what I could to ensure my kid was admitted in the next admission cycle, if I felt they would do well with the program. I would not be on DCUM insulting the parents and kids in the program, or saying all the kids in the program should lose the opportunity to participate. Because I would have enough insight to realize that I was disappointed my kid had missed an opportunity, and worried that it would affect them down the road. Neither of which was the fault of the parents and kids who were admitted. Just like if my kid missed selection for travel sports, I don't come on DCUM and rant about how all travel sports should be eliminated. Instead, I help my kid get the skills they need to be competitive the next time. It's how kids learn resilience.