Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:95th national percentile is not the same as 95th percentile in Fairfax County.

Take the top 2% in the county, put them in what had always been known as a gifted program, and move on. Set the bar high in General Ed with appropriate differentiation.

Problem is AAP has become so large that exclusion is considered a slight. Scale down the program, and the bulk of the parents will have nothing to complain about because their child didn't make such a stringent cut.

YES! Almost all of the issues stem from the fact parents can't stand for their child to be excluded from a program that in some schools includes a high percentage of a grade. Make AAP truly for the top 2% or 5% of our demographics. The parent of the kid in the top 6th percent won't be happy, but it's different being part of 94% rather than 70%.

And since so many above-average kids will remain in home schools, up the ante there!

Parents in our based school don't give a lick about who gets sent to center. It's nowhere near 30%. So if almost all the issues stem from this, it seems to be a problem limited to some neighborhoods and not others. Yet we all get to suffer your lamentations. If you can't wait to separate the wheat from the chaff, limit it to your area and leave the rest of us alone.

Clearly a parent whose child meets the current standards but wouldn't if they were tightened.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:95th national percentile is not the same as 95th percentile in Fairfax County.

Take the top 2% in the county, put them in what had always been known as a gifted program, and move on. Set the bar high in General Ed with appropriate differentiation.

Problem is AAP has become so large that exclusion is considered a slight. Scale down the program, and the bulk of the parents will have nothing to complain about because their child didn't make such a stringent cut.

Why not just differentiate in AAP? That would seem easier than the many layers you'd need to do so with Gen Ed. Our third grade AAP class has a kid doing fifth grade math, so it already happens.

Because then you would do away with the applications and the eligibility for a majority of kids now in AAP. They would stay in GE, but one that has been deepened and differentiated. Only the top 2-3% would be in a separate program that is differentiated for them.

Do people who want the program paired down, want these current AAP kids to be in general ed and get the general ed curriculum or do they want the general ed curriculum to change. I've been following this board for years and don't think I've ever seen a thread that proposes actual in depth concrete changes to general ed. What is wrong with general ed these days? What needs to be changed? Separate threads for elementary and middle school would be helpful. Until general ed changes are established, I don't see a lot of people successfully advocating to reduce the AAP program. Those families with kids who are on the border will fight for a larger pool of children because they want their children exposed to a curriculum at the level of AAP.

Anonymous wrote:95th national percentile is not the same as 95th percentile in Fairfax County.

Take the top 2% in the county, put them in what had always been known as a gifted program, and move on. Set the bar high in General Ed with appropriate differentiation.

Problem is AAP has become so large that exclusion is considered a slight. Scale down the program, and the bulk of the parents will have nothing to complain about because their child didn't make such a stringent cut.

Why not just differentiate in AAP? That would seem easier than the many layers you'd need to do so with Gen Ed. Our third grade AAP class has a kid doing fifth grade math, so it already happens.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:95th national percentile is not the same as 95th percentile in Fairfax County.

Take the top 2% in the county, put them in what had always been known as a gifted program, and move on. Set the bar high in General Ed with appropriate differentiation.

Problem is AAP has become so large that exclusion is considered a slight. Scale down the program, and the bulk of the parents will have nothing to complain about because their child didn't make such a stringent cut.

YES! Almost all of the issues stem from the fact parents can't stand for their child to be excluded from a program that in some schools includes a high percentage of a grade. Make AAP truly for the top 2% or 5% of our demographics. The parent of the kid in the top 6th percent won't be happy, but it's different being part of 94% rather than 70%.

And since so many above-average kids will remain in home schools, up the ante there!

Yes, yes, and YES.

Anonymous wrote:95th national percentile is not the same as 95th percentile in Fairfax County.

Take the top 2% in the county, put them in what had always been known as a gifted program, and move on. Set the bar high in General Ed with appropriate differentiation.

Problem is AAP has become so large that exclusion is considered a slight. Scale down the program, and the bulk of the parents will have nothing to complain about because their child didn't make such a stringent cut.

This is exactly right and why GT was such a success. Most kids remained in Gen Ed - which was a far better curriculum at the time. The very few who were in GT were kids who everybody knew needed such a program. There was no resentment and no crazed parents were pulling out all the stops to get their child in. FCPS was a much saner place up until about a decade ago, right around when GT turned to AAP.

Of course, those who don't want to hear it will just say, "rose-colored glasses" or "nostalgia" simply because they weren't around to see how much better the system used to be.

The reality is that AAP is becoming a modern day version of "separate but equal." Students from affluent families who are able to pay for test prep, private IQ tests, and tutoring have an edge on the families who do not/cannot. Children with parents who can't afford this, or who don't speak english well, or who just aren't able to be as invested in their child's homework are MUCH less likely to get in - and it has NOTHING to do with the intelligence or giftedness of the child.

It isn't a gifted program. It is a more rigorous schedule, but it is really aimed at any student who might be "held down" by the increasingly lower base at your average FCPS. There are more and more ESL students every year, and with SOLs and budget problems the schools are finding it harder and harder to meet the needs of all students. So suddenly, students who would normally have been average students 20 years ago are "gifted" and moved to AAP.

That is my problem with it. I'd rather them find a way to bring the bottom up than split the top 1/4 away and focus on them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people sometimes get a little bogged down by the fact that the name of the program was changed from GT to AAP around 2008. The program itself didn't change.

It's like when we got a new principal at our high school, and he changed "lunch" to "nutrition break," and "library" to "Informations Materials Center."

You clearly didn't have a child in what was then GT, and haven't been following the steady expansion and decline of the program's quality.

Hey everybody, we have an insider! Surely PP will follow up with a detailed, year by year, county-wide analysis with examples.

Just a parent who had a child in GT and has another child in AAP. No comparison.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people sometimes get a little bogged down by the fact that the name of the program was changed from GT to AAP around 2008. The program itself didn't change.

It's like when we got a new principal at our high school, and he changed "lunch" to "nutrition break," and "library" to "Informations Materials Center."

You clearly didn't have a child in what was then GT, and haven't been following the steady expansion and decline of the program's quality.

You are wrong. I did have a child in a GT center then. I have another child in the AAP center program now. Believe me, I've been following what's going on. Back then, I asked around as to why they were changing the name, and what was going to happen with the program. They said something about wanting to make it clear that this was about being academically gifted as opposed to other types of giftedness. Personally, I think there were more political reasons, though you never know with people in the education field, who sometimes just love coming up with trendy new terms for old things. I was in a variety GT programs, myself, in the 60s and 70s, and am all too familiar with wacky education trends.

At the time my middle child entered the GT center program in 2008, I did find it odd that so many others in that class had qualified. I have an even older child who had qualified for the GT program in the 90s, and it had felt much smaller then. My youngest, who is currently still in an elementary AAP center, was in that awful boom year. This child has not been challenged at all, but it's better than gen ed was, at least. I think if they could weed out the preppers it would help make the program more what it is meant to be, a special needs program. And we definitely need to improve the quality of general ed. General ed here really shortchanges kids who are reasonably bright and hard working.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:95th national percentile is not the same as 95th percentile in Fairfax County.

Take the top 2% in the county, put them in what had always been known as a gifted program, and move on. Set the bar high in General Ed with appropriate differentiation.

Problem is AAP has become so large that exclusion is considered a slight. Scale down the program, and the bulk of the parents will have nothing to complain about because their child didn't make such a stringent cut.

YES! Almost all of the issues stem from the fact parents can't stand for their child to be excluded from a program that in some schools includes a high percentage of a grade. Make AAP truly for the top 2% or 5% of our demographics. The parent of the kid in the top 6th percent won't be happy, but it's different being part of 94% rather than 70%.

And since so many above-average kids will remain in home schools, up the ante there!

Parents in our based school don't give a lick about who gets sent to center. It's nowhere near 30%. So if almost all the issues stem from this, it seems to be a problem limited to some neighborhoods and not others. Yet we all get to suffer your lamentations. If you can't wait to separate the wheat from the chaff, limit it to your area and leave the rest of us alone.

Anonymous wrote:I have to agree with this. I have one DC who is making high As while coasting in a competitive TJ feeder MS-- and doing very little homework or studying. He needs someone to push him harder, challenge him more. And have higher expectations. On the other hand, DC2 works hard in her ES center for good grades, and I think the level of challenge is about right. I would love DC 2 to keep her current program, while DC1 was was moved up to a higher level, like the LV some parents mention. It does DC1 no favor to be allowed to coast academically-- at some point: HS, college, grad school, smart will not be enough. He needs a situation where things stop coming so easily, and he has to learn to really work academically. He is just not learning those skills now.

What is he doing with the time he doesn't need for homework? Being able to coast in school gives a kid the opportunity to be more involved in an outside activity. I know some TJ kids that used that time to be deeply involved in sports, dance, music, theatre...something the child loved that was different from what he or she was doing in school all day. The ability to do so well in a challenging curriculum while spending many hours on a non-academic activity gives the child a chance to really to grow and develop many different aspects of his or her character: leadership, organizational skills, ability to work with others, communication skills and more of the areas that sometimes can be neglected when a child needs to spend all his time on academics. As long as he is having no trouble with the AAP curriculum, I would encourage him to use that extra time he has in a productive way to deeply explore an interest he has.

Best wishes to you- we had the same situation at our house and that is how we managed it. Kid went to TJ and is now at a top ten college and very happy there. Still spends a lot of time on that outside, non-academic activity.

Anonymous wrote:95th national percentile is not the same as 95th percentile in Fairfax County.

Take the top 2% in the county, put them in what had always been known as a gifted program, and move on. Set the bar high in General Ed with appropriate differentiation.

Problem is AAP has become so large that exclusion is considered a slight. Scale down the program, and the bulk of the parents will have nothing to complain about because their child didn't make such a stringent cut.

YES! Almost all of the issues stem from the fact parents can't stand for their child to be excluded from a program that in some schools includes a high percentage of a grade. Make AAP truly for the top 2% or 5% of our demographics. The parent of the kid in the top 6th percent won't be happy, but it's different being part of 94% rather than 70%.

And since so many above-average kids will remain in home schools, up the ante there!

I have to agree with this. I have one DC who is making high As while coasting in a competitive TJ feeder MS-- and doing very little homework or studying. He needs someone to push him harder, challenge him more. And have higher expectations. On the other hand, DC2 works hard in her ES center for good grades, and I think the level of challenge is about right. I would love DC 2 to keep her current program, while DC1 was was moved up to a higher level, like the LV some parents mention. It does DC1 no favor to be allowed to coast academically-- at some point: HS, college, grad school, smart will not be enough. He needs a situation where things stop coming so easily, and he has to learn to really work academically. He is just not learning those skills now.

Anonymous wrote:95th national percentile is not the same as 95th percentile in Fairfax County.

Take the top 2% in the county, put them in what had always been known as a gifted program, and move on. Set the bar high in General Ed with appropriate differentiation.

Problem is AAP has become so large that exclusion is considered a slight. Scale down the program, and the bulk of the parents will have nothing to complain about because their child didn't make such a stringent cut.

Yes.

95th national percentile is not the same as 95th percentile in Fairfax County.

Take the top 2% in the county, put them in what had always been known as a gifted program, and move on. Set the bar high in General Ed with appropriate differentiation.

Problem is AAP has become so large that exclusion is considered a slight. Scale down the program, and the bulk of the parents will have nothing to complain about because their child didn't make such a stringent cut.