Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Fine, just don't make it mandatory for those who would prefer the known quantity at Longfellow.
....and are so insecure about their children's intelligence that they fear they can't make it without whatever the heck that "known" quantity is. How absurd. If your child belongs in AAP chances are they're steering their own learning at a higher level anyway.
what hooey!
Oh, kids who are in AAP are supposed to be "steering their own learning"? Our mistake! Some of us actually thought that the school system was supposed to help steer student learning! Apparently we're wrong and the school system is just there to provide roofs over their heads while the kids themselves steer their own learning!
Even AAP kids need to be taught. And I'd question whether this very sudden expansion of "middle school local Level IV' is going to include much, or any, retraining for teachers or moving of teachers who are already trained to teach AAP or experienced in teaching it. But the haters would say that teacher training and experience aren't needed since, after all, our AAP snowflakes are clearly capable of teaching themselves, right? Just hand 'em the curriculum and let them have at it!
Why should money (that doesn't exist in the FCPS budget) continue to be spent on training AAP teachers and expanding LLIV? Are there not many more pressing concerns for FCPS to worry about, such as overcrowded classrooms for [b]all children, and improving the Gen Ed curriculum? [/b] Frankly, if you're that concerned that your snowflake isn't getting what they "need" (ahem), homeschool or go private. This is a public school system with many kids to serve, not just the AAP contingent.
The problem is, certain school board members have publically stated that they would rather have McLean/Great Falls schools overcrowded at the expense of other county schools in "poorer" neighborhoods-we are talking class sizes of 28-30 versus 14 or so-so if you think there is equal access for all in FCPS, you have another think coming...it is not just AAP that is sucking up resources and all animals are equal though some are more equal than others, to quote Orwell...
How does having McLean and Great Falls schools overcrowded come "at the expense of" schools in "poorer" neighborhoods? Seems like some twisted syntax.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Fine, just don't make it mandatory for those who would prefer the known quantity at Longfellow.
....and are so insecure about their children's intelligence that they fear they can't make it without whatever the heck that "known" quantity is. How absurd. If your child belongs in AAP chances are they're steering their own learning at a higher level anyway.
what hooey!
Oh, kids who are in AAP are supposed to be "steering their own learning"? Our mistake! Some of us actually thought that the school system was supposed to help steer student learning! Apparently we're wrong and the school system is just there to provide roofs over their heads while the kids themselves steer their own learning!
Even AAP kids need to be taught. And I'd question whether this very sudden expansion of "middle school local Level IV' is going to include much, or any, retraining for teachers or moving of teachers who are already trained to teach AAP or experienced in teaching it. But the haters would say that teacher training and experience aren't needed since, after all, our AAP snowflakes are clearly capable of teaching themselves, right? Just hand 'em the curriculum and let them have at it!
Why should money (that doesn't exist in the FCPS budget) continue to be spent on training AAP teachers and expanding LLIV? Are there not many more pressing concerns for FCPS to worry about, such as overcrowded classrooms for [b]all children, and improving the Gen Ed curriculum? [/b] Frankly, if you're that concerned that your snowflake isn't getting what they "need" (ahem), homeschool or go private. This is a public school system with many kids to serve, not just the AAP contingent.
The problem is, certain school board members have publically stated that they would rather have McLean/Great Falls schools overcrowded at the expense of other county schools in "poorer" neighborhoods-we are talking class sizes of 28-30 versus 14 or so-so if you think there is equal access for all in FCPS, you have another think coming...it is not just AAP that is sucking up resources and all animals are equal though some are more equal than others, to quote Orwell...
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
And if you fear having anything less than the most experienced teachers with the most training is going to keep your AAP child from reaching his/her potential in an area as educated as this one, you've got bigger problems.
I think this has to be the reasonable middle ground. The notion that AAP kids who aren't on that much of a higher plain than most of the other students in these pyramids are going to be woefully underserved unless their teachers receive oodles of specialiazed training, and have already spent years in other AAP centers, seems informed more by a sense of entitlement than by actual pedagogy.
Anonymous wrote:
And if you fear having anything less than the most experienced teachers with the most training is going to keep your AAP child from reaching his/her potential in an area as educated as this one, you've got bigger problems.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Fine, just don't make it mandatory for those who would prefer the known quantity at Longfellow.
....and are so insecure about their children's intelligence that they fear they can't make it without whatever the heck that "known" quantity is. How absurd. If your child belongs in AAP chances are they're steering their own learning at a higher level anyway.
what hooey!
Oh, kids who are in AAP are supposed to be "steering their own learning"? Our mistake! Some of us actually thought that the school system was supposed to help steer student learning! Apparently we're wrong and the school system is just there to provide roofs over their heads while the kids themselves steer their own learning!
Even AAP kids need to be taught. And I'd question whether this very sudden expansion of "middle school local Level IV' is going to include much, or any, retraining for teachers or moving of teachers who are already trained to teach AAP or experienced in teaching it. But the haters would say that teacher training and experience aren't needed since, after all, our AAP snowflakes are clearly capable of teaching themselves, right? Just hand 'em the curriculum and let them have at it!
Why should money (that doesn't exist in the FCPS budget) continue to be spent on training AAP teachers and expanding LLIV? Are there not many more pressing concerns for FCPS to worry about, such as overcrowded classrooms for [b]all children, and improving the Gen Ed curriculum? [/b] Frankly, if you're that concerned that your snowflake isn't getting what they "need" (ahem), homeschool or go private. This is a public school system with many kids to serve, not just the AAP contingent.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Fine, just don't make it mandatory for those who would prefer the known quantity at Longfellow.
....and are so insecure about their children's intelligence that they fear they can't make it without whatever the heck that "known" quantity is. How absurd. If your child belongs in AAP chances are they're steering their own learning at a higher level anyway.
what hooey!
Oh, kids who are in AAP are supposed to be "steering their own learning"? Our mistake! Some of us actually thought that the school system was supposed to help steer student learning! Apparently we're wrong and the school system is just there to provide roofs over their heads while the kids themselves steer their own learning!
Even AAP kids need to be taught. And I'd question whether this very sudden expansion of "middle school local Level IV' is going to include much, or any, retraining for teachers or moving of teachers who are already trained to teach AAP or experienced in teaching it. But the haters would say that teacher training and experience aren't needed since, after all, our AAP snowflakes are clearly capable of teaching themselves, right? Just hand 'em the curriculum and let them have at it!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Fine, just don't make it mandatory for those who would prefer the known quantity at Longfellow.
....and are so insecure about their children's intelligence that they fear they can't make it without whatever the heck that "known" quantity is. How absurd. If your child belongs in AAP chances are they're steering their own learning at a higher level anyway.
what hooey!
Oh, kids who are in AAP are supposed to be "steering their own learning"? Our mistake! Some of us actually thought that the school system was supposed to help steer student learning! Apparently we're wrong and the school system is just there to provide roofs over their heads while the kids themselves steer their own learning!
Even AAP kids need to be taught. And I'd question whether this very sudden expansion of "middle school local Level IV' is going to include much, or any, retraining for teachers or moving of teachers who are already trained to teach AAP or experienced in teaching it. But the haters would say that teacher training and experience aren't needed since, after all, our AAP snowflakes are clearly capable of teaching themselves, right? Just hand 'em the curriculum and let them have at it!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Fine, just don't make it mandatory for those who would prefer the known quantity at Longfellow.
....and are so insecure about their children's intelligence that they fear they can't make it without whatever the heck that "known" quantity is. How absurd. If your child belongs in AAP chances are they're steering their own learning at a higher level anyway.
what hooey!
Anonymous wrote:I just posted this on the Thoreau thread: Local Level IV seems to be the trend that FCPS is promoting. Its happening in MS and ES. And Each year more and more schools are offering it. Maybe eventually doing away with AAP centers and program and just having LEVEL IV "advanced" classes at all schools.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You both (all?) are so nasty -- what kind of example are you setting for your children?
examples of non-entitlement, I hope.
What is that supposed to mean? As far as I can tell it's equal opportunity sense of entitlement here.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You both (all?) are so nasty -- what kind of example are you setting for your children?
examples of non-entitlement, I hope.
Anonymous wrote:You both (all?) are so nasty -- what kind of example are you setting for your children?
jAnonymous wrote:That is not what anyone is saying, AAP hater...