Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AART claims when all the kids are high achieving no one is worthy of level IV instruction because they already have their peer group. But this couldn’t be further from the truth. The teachers lack skill in identifying these students and don’t put much effort into advancement.

I have no dog in this fight but their read on it shows how teachers in general (not just at GFES but at most Elementary schools) misread what advanced academic servhces are for and how to identify children who are best served with advanced academic servhces.
In general—what the AART is saying here pretty much aligns completely with how most schools treat this program…
That is—they use it as “ability-grouping” to pull out the high-achievers because if they don’t, the academic achievement/performance gap across a classroom of students in the same grade-level is so wide as to make a regular Gen Ed class nearly impossible for the teacher to manage. The AAP services in FCPS allows those student to be removed from the classroom and instructed separately so that the teacher can focus on the remaining students who at at or below (and sometimes 3-4 levels below) grade level.
And because of this, the AART is probably correct that they don’t really “need” the program because the students at GFES are generally performing and achieving at the same level.
AAP programs in FCPS haven’t actually been “gifted” programs for a very long time, imo.

As someone with a high achieving student who has been denied AAP at a competitive school, this is exactly what's so backwards about it. The AAP kids are getting a very academically homogenous group so they can do more extensions, more interesting projects, more challenges, etc., and the high achieving students like mine who also are above grade level but not in AAP get none of that and are grouped, as you put it, with students 3-4 levels below grade level who are the teacher's real focus in the classroom.

I agree and am incredibly frustrated. Agree kids are high achieving but you have 3 or 4 kids who struggle in the class and that is where the focus is and teachers will even admit it because they are required to devote more time to them because they need it. It takes away the chance for my kid to be THIER best. Grrrr. if GFES had more focus on academics maybe it would be passable but. Gah.

Never ever thought we do private but I’m tired of my kid being bored.

The teachers 100% focus on the students that are behind. If a student is ahead they get ignored. For example at GFES in 2nd grade my son was in a class with students that needed a lot of extra help/attention. At the end of the year I saw his vocabulary book from school and it was completely blank. I asked him why he didn’t have anything in it. He told me it was because group never met with the teacher because they “already knew all the words”. How is it possible that a 2nd grader knows “all the words”, they might know all 2nd grade words, but that isn’t an excuse to teach them nothing all year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AART claims when all the kids are high achieving no one is worthy of level IV instruction because they already have their peer group. But this couldn’t be further from the truth. The teachers lack skill in identifying these students and don’t put much effort into advancement.

I have no dog in this fight but their read on it shows how teachers in general (not just at GFES but at most Elementary schools) misread what advanced academic servhces are for and how to identify children who are best served with advanced academic servhces.
In general—what the AART is saying here pretty much aligns completely with how most schools treat this program…
That is—they use it as “ability-grouping” to pull out the high-achievers because if they don’t, the academic achievement/performance gap across a classroom of students in the same grade-level is so wide as to make a regular Gen Ed class nearly impossible for the teacher to manage. The AAP services in FCPS allows those student to be removed from the classroom and instructed separately so that the teacher can focus on the remaining students who at at or below (and sometimes 3-4 levels below) grade level.
And because of this, the AART is probably correct that they don’t really “need” the program because the students at GFES are generally performing and achieving at the same level.
AAP programs in FCPS haven’t actually been “gifted” programs for a very long time, imo.

As someone with a high achieving student who has been denied AAP at a competitive school, this is exactly what's so backwards about it. The AAP kids are getting a very academically homogenous group so they can do more extensions, more interesting projects, more challenges, etc., and the high achieving students like mine who also are above grade level but not in AAP get none of that and are grouped, as you put it, with students 3-4 levels below grade level who are the teacher's real focus in the classroom.

I agree and am incredibly frustrated. Agree kids are high achieving but you have 3 or 4 kids who struggle in the class and that is where the focus is and teachers will even admit it because they are required to devote more time to them because they need it. It takes away the chance for my kid to be THIER best. Grrrr. if GFES had more focus on academics maybe it would be passable but. Gah.

Never ever thought we do private but I’m tired of my kid being bored.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AART claims when all the kids are high achieving no one is worthy of level IV instruction because they already have their peer group. But this couldn’t be further from the truth. The teachers lack skill in identifying these students and don’t put much effort into advancement.

I have no dog in this fight but their read on it shows how teachers in general (not just at GFES but at most Elementary schools) misread what advanced academic servhces are for and how to identify children who are best served with advanced academic servhces.
In general—what the AART is saying here pretty much aligns completely with how most schools treat this program…
That is—they use it as “ability-grouping” to pull out the high-achievers because if they don’t, the academic achievement/performance gap across a classroom of students in the same grade-level is so wide as to make a regular Gen Ed class nearly impossible for the teacher to manage. The AAP services in FCPS allows those student to be removed from the classroom and instructed separately so that the teacher can focus on the remaining students who at at or below (and sometimes 3-4 levels below) grade level.
And because of this, the AART is probably correct that they don’t really “need” the program because the students at GFES are generally performing and achieving at the same level.
AAP programs in FCPS haven’t actually been “gifted” programs for a very long time, imo.

As someone with a high achieving student who has been denied AAP at a competitive school, this is exactly what's so backwards about it. The AAP kids are getting a very academically homogenous group so they can do more extensions, more interesting projects, more challenges, etc., and the high achieving students like mine who also are above grade level but not in AAP get none of that and are grouped, as you put it, with students 3-4 levels below grade level who are the teacher's real focus in the classroom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AART claims when all the kids are high achieving no one is worthy of level IV instruction because they already have their peer group. But this couldn’t be further from the truth. The teachers lack skill in identifying these students and don’t put much effort into advancement.

I have no dog in this fight but their read on it shows how teachers in general (not just at GFES but at most Elementary schools) misread what advanced academic servhces are for and how to identify children who are best served with advanced academic servhces.
In general—what the AART is saying here pretty much aligns completely with how most schools treat this program…
That is—they use it as “ability-grouping” to pull out the high-achievers because if they don’t, the academic achievement/performance gap across a classroom of students in the same grade-level is so wide as to make a regular Gen Ed class nearly impossible for the teacher to manage. The AAP services in FCPS allows those student to be removed from the classroom and instructed separately so that the teacher can focus on the remaining students who at at or below (and sometimes 3-4 levels below) grade level.
And because of this, the AART is probably correct that they don’t really “need” the program because the students at GFES are generally performing and achieving at the same level.
AAP programs in FCPS haven’t actually been “gifted” programs for a very long time, imo.

Anonymous wrote:Wait, your kid's FCPS classes are 15-16 kids??? Is this what being rich gets you?

Anonymous wrote:Wait, your kid's FCPS classes are 15-16 kids??? Is this what being rich gets you?

Anonymous wrote:Wait, your kid's FCPS classes are 15-16 kids??? Is this what being rich gets you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no poor kids there so everyone is fine being served by the general ed

This. We're in a school with similar (but not as wealthy) demographics. We didn't push for our kids to get into AAP because they were getting a great education in general ed. Meanwhile our friends at a school with a high low income and ESOL population were all test prepping and getting WISC tests and reapplying every year until their kid got into AAP so that they could be with a similar peer group. That peer group already existed in ALL of our school's classes.

The gened education is not great. In fact it’s quite poor.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know what you’re taking about. The classes in first grade have 15-16 kids all day. And in 2nd they have 18-19 all day.

Pretty sure you’re confused.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know what you’re taking about. The classes in first grade have 15-16 kids all day. And in 2nd they have 18-19 all day.

Pretty sure you’re confused.