Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Camelot and Fairhill parents have themselves to blame.
Maybe they don't see it as a negative like you do. Maybe they see it as a POSITIVE -- getting 150 kids out of LJ this year and eventually having 300 less than they have now. Maybe they are fine with the education their kids are receiving (even if other kids are struggling with other challenges -- language, economic background). Maybe they have more faith in their kids' ability and faith in the LJ administration and teachers to keep doing what they've been doing all along.
LJ will end up like Glasgow.
That’s a best-case scenario.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Camelot and Fairhill parents have themselves to blame.
Maybe they don't see it as a negative like you do. Maybe they see it as a POSITIVE -- getting 150 kids out of LJ this year and eventually having 300 less than they have now. Maybe they are fine with the education their kids are receiving (even if other kids are struggling with other challenges -- language, economic background). Maybe they have more faith in their kids' ability and faith in the LJ administration and teachers to keep doing what they've been doing all along.
LJ will end up like Glasgow.
That’s a best-case scenario.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Camelot and Fairhill parents have themselves to blame.
Maybe they don't see it as a negative like you do. Maybe they see it as a POSITIVE -- getting 150 kids out of LJ this year and eventually having 300 less than they have now. Maybe they are fine with the education their kids are receiving (even if other kids are struggling with other challenges -- language, economic background). Maybe they have more faith in their kids' ability and faith in the LJ administration and teachers to keep doing what they've been doing all along.
LJ will end up like Glasgow.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Camelot and Fairhill parents have themselves to blame.
Maybe they don't see it as a negative like you do. Maybe they see it as a POSITIVE -- getting 150 kids out of LJ this year and eventually having 300 less than they have now. Maybe they are fine with the education their kids are receiving (even if other kids are struggling with other challenges -- language, economic background). Maybe they have more faith in their kids' ability and faith in the LJ administration and teachers to keep doing what they've been doing all along.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:could someone please clarify this for me?
A current 7th grader at LJMS from Mosby Woods non-AAP will stay at LJMS for 8th grade next year. But the 6th grade sibling who is also not in AAP must go to Thoreau for 7th grade?
Current students get a choice. Incoming only has choice if aap.
Anonymous wrote:could someone please clarify this for me?
A current 7th grader at LJMS from Mosby Woods non-AAP will stay at LJMS for 8th grade next year. But the 6th grade sibling who is also not in AAP must go to Thoreau for 7th grade?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Camelot and Fairhill parents have themselves to blame.
Maybe they don't see it as a negative like you do. Maybe they see it as a POSITIVE -- getting 150 kids out of LJ this year and eventually having 300 less than they have now. Maybe they are fine with the education their kids are receiving (even if other kids are struggling with other challenges -- language, economic background). Maybe they have more faith in their kids' ability and faith in the LJ administration and teachers to keep doing what they've been doing all along.
Exactly! Well said.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Camelot and Fairhill parents have themselves to blame.
Maybe they don't see it as a negative like you do. Maybe they see it as a POSITIVE -- getting 150 kids out of LJ this year and eventually having 300 less than they have now. Maybe they are fine with the education their kids are receiving (even if other kids are struggling with other challenges -- language, economic background). Maybe they have more faith in their kids' ability and faith in the LJ administration and teachers to keep doing what they've been doing all along.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:could someone please clarify this for me?
A current 7th grader at LJMS from Mosby Woods non-AAP will stay at LJMS for 8th grade next year. But the 6th grade sibling who is also not in AAP must go to Thoreau for 7th grade?
yes.
Anonymous wrote:I don't dispute that there may be some changes to the LJ AAP numbers on the margins. Still, academic-minded parents will continue attracted to a middle school AAP program that prepares students exceptionally well for high school, fields successful academic extracurricular teams like Science Olympiad and MathCounts, and sends a solid contingent of students to TJ each year (where they flourish, based on first-hand knowledge of multiple LJ AAP alumni at TJ). Time will tell how this all shakes out, of course, but based on the above, I predict that the LJ AAP program will remain strong for many years to come.
Anonymous wrote:could someone please clarify this for me?
A current 7th grader at LJMS from Mosby Woods non-AAP will stay at LJMS for 8th grade next year. But the 6th grade sibling who is also not in AAP must go to Thoreau for 7th grade?