Anonymous wrote:Serious question. What is the point for elementary and middle when anyone can take AP in high school? It also seems like unless you have a goal for TJ, there really is no actual purpose earlier on... My child got accepted and will be starting this year but I am still boggled on whether it’s actually worth something so early on. Would love feedback on what you feel your child gained from the program overall...Or if they gained anything at all?

The biggest point is a better peer group, the rest is fluff.

I think public school should educate and challenge more than just children at or below grade level, give more than just those students opportunities to potentially fail. That in a nutshell to me is the point. I am not saying public school should differentiation to multiple levels above grade level - the devil is in the details - but broadly that it should not serve only at and below grade level.

Anonymous wrote:
Creating this kind of competitive educational system also does one more thing: instead of teaching 1-4 different levels of kids in one class at a school, it’s down to about 1-2 for gen Ed and and AAP. It is a little easier for teachers. And I think helpful is raising kids up without lowering kids down.

In theory, that's how it should work. In practice, they aren't really looking at the kids' achievement levels when deciding whether they are admitted to AAP, and they aren't looking at the reading or math levels that can be accommodated in the base school. My DD: perfect reading SOL every single year. Always at the maxed out DRA of 1 year above grade level. Rejected from AAP and frequently unable to be placed in a reading group at her level because there weren't any other kids reading a year above in gen ed. At least 2 years had to repeat info from the previous year due to being "folded down" into a lower reading group. Despite screwing over my DD, the teacher still had 4 grade levels to differentiate across, ranging from 3 years below grade level to on grade level.

My DS: Attended the center. Was reading 2 years above grade level. The teacher met with his group at most 15 minutes per week because there was a below grade level reading group and an on grade level reading group in AAP. The teacher still had 4 levels to differentiate across, ranging from 1 year below through 2 years above. The teacher was pressured to focus on the below kids at the expense of the above kids.

Thank you all for the feedback. I am the OP. I think the answer that resonated with me the most is that if you treat kids as “smart,” they also see themselves as smarter and it becomes a self fulfilling prophesy. I think this is true. Since my son got in, he already feels more confident in himself. Its like when someone tells you that you are attractive, you suddenly believe it more and it shows in your confidence. Also, being pushed to think to your potential is a good thing instead of sailing through (which is what he was doing.)

BTW, we live in a high income area, so even gen ed has been great. I do understand that there is way more distinction in lower SES areas.

Science nerd mom here. Tax bracket is over 250k.

Yes my kids play sports. Healthy bodies are important to us.

Yes my kids are in AAP. Healthy minds are important to us.

AAP is the only reason why we are in FCPS or living in Fairfax county. We would otherwise live in CA.

AAP exists in part to keep the tax bracket average here high. Without it, a good portion of Fairfax county would just move. It’s very expensive to live here, and honestly without kids we could live in a more affordable area. The tracking works for us.

Creating this kind of competitive educational system also does one more thing: instead of teaching 1-4 different levels of kids in one class at a school, it’s down to about 1-2 for gen Ed and and AAP. It is a little easier for teachers. And I think helpful is raising kids up without lowering kids down.

Do I think it’s fair? The reality is that it is done in other counties/states but not so blatantly and not so much on such a large scale. The other reality is that a lot of parents assume their kids will get in and get mad when their kids don’t get in. So the OPs question gets posted much more often because people become aware of the difference. This is leads to my next observation:

I have one kid who is extremely intelligent (in aap) and another who is not as gifted in math (not in aap). But both do well because they know there is another group of kids who are in the smart class. The awareness that intelligence is awarded is important to them at this age and having local level IV is good.

In that aspect, it’s nice to have AAP. I think if there was a longitudinal study to see the effects of having this separation on overall graduation levels and advanced education in fcps that would most likely be the reason to keep aap vs eliminate it. But my observation is that it is good for our kids overall- even if they don’t get into aap.

Anonymous wrote:The regular curriculum in this country is designed for students with academic capabilities lower than average.

This is pretty much it. Schools can’t track the lowest 20% in elementary school so they track the highest 20%. It’s the only way to keep those students in the public school system.

The regular curriculum in this country is designed for students with academic capabilities lower than average.

Anonymous wrote:Its to keep your kids out of general ed and all the problems that go with it.

Thats it.

This is true even at our school that's considered a good ES in FCPS. When kids don't get into AAP, their parents switch them to private school.

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. What is the point for elementary and middle when anyone can take AP in high school? It also seems like unless you have a goal for TJ, there really is no actual purpose earlier on... My child got accepted and will be starting this year but I am still boggled on whether it’s actually worth something so early on. Would love feedback on what you feel your child gained from the program overall...Or if they gained anything at all?

Segregate the rich from poor?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no point period.

I did gifted and talented 30 years ago in elementary school and there is absolutely no point.

There is no point to accelerate math, there is no point to attend afterschool training classes, there is no point for TJ either.

Accelerating math does more harm than good in many cases. Most folks aren't actually learning the material properly, additionally 1 class of Calculus in high school is plenty. Skipping more than one math sequence in college is universally panned.

The workplace does not care about AAP or TJ.

Success in life is based on who you know and your work ethic. Raw intelligence can make things easier and faster sometimes but that's about it.

It's hard to develop a work ethic when everything comes too easily. I am one of unfortunately many people out there who attended regular schools, never had to try for an A, sailed through a college STEM major without really trying, and then reached grad school where I had no study skills and no resilience when things were challenging.

AAP fails spectacularly at this, but the point of a gifted program should be to make sure that no child can sail through school without putting in any effort. If academics are too easy for a kid through K-12, they will be set up for failure at some point down the road.

Sorry, but sailing through college and encountering difficulty in grad school is not a failure of the student or of the school system.

Yup hate to break it to you folks. Most jobs are boring and repetitive. No one cares how smart you are or how high your IQ is.

This does not reflect my workplace experience at all.

Humm what industry are you in. From my experience most workplaces care about profitability and then kissing butt to folks above to rise through the ranks fastest.

I've been in both engineering and academia. In either case, being able to consistently solve unplanned/unannounced problems, being able to efficiently learn new skills and absorb instructions, and being able to convey your understanding effectively to others would make you a coveted employee. Each of those skill are closely related to smarts and IQ.

My sister is in a more prototypical "rise through the ranks" profession, but she was able to rise quickly to the top because she learned a unique and sought-after skillset which would be challenging for the typical person to learn.

It's all about distributing high achieving kids more equally across the county. For example, Louise Archer was a below-average to average rank (on Great Schools). Make it an AAP center packed with high-achieving kids an voila - it's a Great Schools 10. Parents moving into the area don't know that it's because of the center, but they see the 10, buy a house and add their high-achieving kids to the mix. Over time, the entire neighborhood turns over and a somewhat "undesirable" school has become highly sought after.

Not as true now that almost every school has AAP, but I believe this was the original plan.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It made a difference for my kid. There are faster paced classes, fewer distractions, and socially my child finally found a group of friends where they fit in bc their peers are more quirky, academically-driven students v. the sports-obsessed kids in GenEd. I’m not arguing one is better than the other but in our experience AAP has been a better fit for my child and they finally feel like they fit somewhere.

Hahahahaha AAP is for children of ambitious parents. In my kids ES that means the kids who are supposedly strong academically (most of whom get extensive tutoring btw) are the same ones whose parents sign them up for sports every season. They’re the overbooked kids and they’re all involved in the same things so it’s very cliquey/mean girl type behavior starting in third grade. This is from the perspective of an LLIV school, not a center.

I wrote the above that you’re responding to and have a boy at a center. This hasn’t been our experience at all but I appreciate hearing your experience and can see from this and other responses that AAP varies widely across the county and at LLIV v center etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this question comes up a lot. If your base school has the majority of kids at or slightly above grade level, AAP is one of those things that’s probably not necessary for most kids, except for the advanced math part. If your base school has 20+% of kids who are 2-3 grades behind, AAP is the only reason a lot of families with kids who are above average will consider staying at the school. Teachers can’t differentiate that much within a single classroom and even if they could, the kids who are behind are going to require/ receive much more attention.

This is exactly what it is. My two kids were in local Level IV. I live in an area that is convenient for me but the school has wayyy too many poor kids that create classroom problems. If my third kid doesn't get into AAP in a few years we are going to move to the Langley pyramid. I don't enjoy maxing my housing budget but I am prepared to do it.

Oh my god, listen to the privilege being spewed out of your mouth “too many poor kids that cause problems”. You sound awful.

All i know to tell you is that as bad as it sounds, it's the truth. Maybe if you lived in a high-ish poverty school you would know. Kids come to school without breakfast, hell maybe haven't eaten for 24 hours for all I know. Can't sit still, can't walk in a line. One kid spend the entire school year in my son's first grade class just wandering around the back of the room yelling and throwing stuff at the teacher and other kids ALL DAY LONG FOR THE WHOLE YEAR instead of participating in class. I saw a mom drop her son to school off at the office (arrived the same time as me from a doctor's appointment at ELEVEN O'CLOCK) drunk off her ass. Slurring words, claiming they overslept cause she overdosed her son on benadryl (even that fake story almost sounds worse than being an alcoholic). I did volunteer lunch supervision and was cursed out by a poor kid who insisted he didn't need to be in his seat for lunch DURING COVID. Had to put him in his place. These kids get no discipline at home and the schools sure as hell aren't doing it. So yeah, if I want my kids to learn anything they have to be in AAP. It's sad but true

Anonymous wrote:If a parent is sports focused, they get to be portrayed by Will Smith in a movie ("King Richard") win an Oscar and be widely acclaimed. Do the same thing for academics, you get called as a "cheat", "privileged", "micromanaged" and all sorts of names on DCUM.

Aw, mama is jealous because her baby is a nerd and not an athlete.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this question comes up a lot. If your base school has the majority of kids at or slightly above grade level, AAP is one of those things that’s probably not necessary for most kids, except for the advanced math part. If your base school has 20+% of kids who are 2-3 grades behind, AAP is the only reason a lot of families with kids who are above average will consider staying at the school. Teachers can’t differentiate that much within a single classroom and even if they could, the kids who are behind are going to require/ receive much more attention.

This is exactly what it is. My two kids were in local Level IV. I live in an area that is convenient for me but the school has wayyy too many poor kids that create classroom problems. If my third kid doesn't get into AAP in a few years we are going to move to the Langley pyramid. I don't enjoy maxing my housing budget but I am prepared to do it.

Oh my god, listen to the privilege being spewed out of your mouth “too many poor kids that cause problems”. You sound awful.