If the bussing costs are that big an issue, why can't they offer it but charge a fee? My child is at a center and I would pay a good amount for a bus because not having a bus would cause me major childcare issues that would cost much more to address.

I would have thought the folks on this board would be very, very upset about these recommendations. I certainly am. Now is the time to write letters to Dr. Garza & the School Board mentioning how important the AAP is to our kids, so they know parents support this program. No, it's not perfect by a long shot, but look at the recommendations, and their consequences: (1) cut busing to AAP where there's LLIV -- this hurts working families who can't provide their own transportation, and keeps everybody at their local schools regardless of whether that's best for the child. Stop pretending LLIV is the same as a Center. It's not. Even in wealthier areas, no elementary school has the kind of "critical mass" that Centers have. It's not the same. Perhaps the middle schools in our wealthier areas have "critical mass," but at the elementary level it's just not the case. More to the point, who's hurt by this? The very population who have historically been underrepresented in AAP -- kids from less privileged backgrounds. Rich moms & dads will find a way to get their kid to the Center if their kid needs it. It's the rest of the families who will be screwed. (2) have LLIV everywhere, no centers. That would honestly not be an AAP. The whole philosophy behind FCPS' current AAP is to gather together similar kids so they can support one another. It's the right approach, and it's been used as a model elsewhere; FCPS just did a study on our AAP in 2013, so they know this. Eliminating LLIV is just leaving kids where they are and pretending that we're providing services for them.

As other posters have mentioned, the so-called savings from either of these proposals don't even make sense. You've got to bus kids SOMEWHERE in elementary school... does it make sense that there are massive savings when you shift that bus from one school to another? This screws up all the capital planning the Board has done for years and likely means more trailers.... is that in the "savings?" If you have LLIV everywhere, don't we need more teachers to immediately be trained to educate AAP kids? Isn't that expensive?

Get mad, guys.

Anonymous wrote:

We drive our kid back and forth everyday, anyway, which is what a lot of other people do. I don't think it would be that big a deal to eliminate at least some of the bussing to TJ.

If you drive your kid back and forth every day then you KNOW there are a ton of buses. Especially in the afternoons, there is almost no space on the TJ buses. They are packed. And every bus has well over a dozen stops. We are in a morning carpool, but the afternoon is too crazy and we all work. Our kids all take the bus home. If there were no buses, a large % of TJ kids could not attend.

Those busses always look half empty to me.

Anonymous wrote:

We drive our kid back and forth everyday, anyway, which is what a lot of other people do. I don't think it would be that big a deal to eliminate at least some of the bussing to TJ.

If you drive your kid back and forth every day then you KNOW there are a ton of buses. Especially in the afternoons, there is almost no space on the TJ buses. They are packed. And every bus has well over a dozen stops. We are in a morning carpool, but the afternoon is too crazy and we all work. Our kids all take the bus home. If there were no buses, a large % of TJ kids could not attend.

I'm fine with buses for TJ. Kids are drawn from as far away as Loudoun to go to what is Northern Virginia's only magnet high school. Busing to AAP centers is another story since much of it is unnecessary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"screening" may be required, but what if they "screened" by using the current tests and then just let the AART and teachers at the school take (a) any kid who meets a certain cut off (like 135) and then the teachers/aart can fill out the rest of the class with any other kids who have been referred and have a high score or any kids they think might fit in. Isn't that what happens now with local level 4? Principals can fill out the class with good students who weren't officially designated "AAP."

My point is -- they could still "screen" in multiple ways without going through the whole committee review process. They would simply make the assignment to the level 4 class a much more local decision.

Screening and selection by a committee is required by Virginia. So is an appeals process through the committee. So is a separate advisorary committee which includes parents of gifted students that helps to evaluate and structure each district"s gifted program and policies. All of these are mandated by the state. The districts submit a plan for gifted screening, identification, appeals processes, and the actual program which must be approved by the state (and based off recommendations from the advisory committee).

Fairfax County Public Schools cannot just waive a wand and poof! AAP as we know it disappears. They might be able to tighten up identification and do away with busses. They might be able to make some ot those McLean/Vienna type areas with the huge critical mass all LLIV with no centers, but they are not going to be able to simply eliminate centers and AAP completely as you wish.

Wrong. My kid is at a center. I'm just wondering what this all means -- what they aren't saying directly, and whether eliminating centers and reducing the cost of selecting kids is what they are getting at. Clearly, no district is "required" by the state to have full time AAP or centers. So, is FCPS trying to go toward the models that ACPS and LCPS use? That's what I want to know. It will affect my kid.

We drive our kid back and forth everyday, anyway, which is what a lot of other people do. I don't think it would be that big a deal to eliminate at least some of the bussing to TJ.

If you drive your kid back and forth every day then you KNOW there are a ton of buses. Especially in the afternoons, there is almost no space on the TJ buses. They are packed. And every bus has well over a dozen stops. We are in a morning carpool, but the afternoon is too crazy and we all work. Our kids all take the bus home. If there were no buses, a large % of TJ kids could not attend.

Anonymous wrote:Local Level IV IS tracking if it involves principal placement.

Center services require concrete testing showing a need for gifted services and comprehensive assessment by an impartial, outside committee for placement.

Local Level IV that includes pupil placement is tracking based off opinions of a principal.

Stop pretending like the screening process for AAP centers is scientific. Much of it is based off of data that is as subjective as any principal placement, in addition you have flawed tests that kids prep for even though they're not supposed to and many kids having outside testing that others don't. It's a process that favors and in many cases "tracks" kids from affluent families who have been given more advantages and enrichment. Talk about drinking the kool aid.

Anonymous wrote:Local Level IV IS tracking if it involves principal placement.

Center services require concrete testing showing a need for gifted services and comprehensive assessment by an impartial, outside committee for placement.

Local Level IV that includes pupil placement is tracking based off opinions of a principal.

I thought that the kind of tracking that is not allowed is tracking that has a racial element to it, in that kids of one race or another are all placed together. Tracking that groups kids by academic ability and track record would not fall into that category, I believe.

Simply putting kids into academic groupings does not per se indicate the bad kind of tracking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since TJ is a center, will this busing also be eliminated. Are magnet ES schools being eliminated?

TJ isn't an ES, so busing would not be eliminated (neither would it be for MSs, like Thoreau & Franklin) with local programs.

Most kids at TJ don't take the busses anyway. Lots of carpools and then kids drive themselves when they get their licenses. Or kids get driven to a bus depot at a high school.

We drive our kid back and forth everyday, anyway, which is what a lot of other people do. I don't think it would be that big a deal to eliminate at least some of the bussing to TJ.

Local Level IV IS tracking if it involves principal placement.

Center services require concrete testing showing a need for gifted services and comprehensive assessment by an impartial, outside committee for placement.

Local Level IV that includes pupil placement is tracking based off opinions of a principal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that the proposal to put level 4 in every ES is just a backdoor way of saying "no more centers."

How would there be any savings if you are putting local level 4 classes in every ES and still keeping all the existing centers? Wouldn't that be more expensive???? Unless you are actually closing the centers -----> thereby saving the costs of busing and perhaps saving the costs of selecting kids for centers. Maybe part of the "savings" is that AARTs and teachers just place kids in local level 4s (no busing, no "in pool" committees)?

That couldn't be, that would just be tracking. I agree, not sure how it saves money and might even cost more (as centers may maximize economies of scale).

Offering LLIV services at base schools would NOT be tracking anymore than busing kids to a center. It would actually be cheaper and make more sense in many school districts. I love how "tracking" is always trotted out as a bad word when that is essentially what the whole AAP process is anyhow, only you get tracked for a longer time and there are ZERO penalties if a kid can't keep up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are adding level 4 to all elementary schools

And

you are eliminating busing to centers when there is a local level 4, then aren't you eliminating all AAP busing to all centers?

So, what is the point of having centers?

why would you say you are eliminating busing to center "IF there is a local level 4" since according to the other term, all ESs will have local level 4. Why the "if" -- it seems as though there would be few centers if there is no busing at all.

you can get to centers by car.

You can, but in many neighborhoods this would create a logistical nightmare. We have a relatively new center in our area and the traffic is already over the top. The school will someday house 900-1000 kids and it's not too hard to imagine what a mess it would be if all AAP kids were driven to school -- remember these are generally families who don't live in the neighborhood and have little concern for residents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are adding level 4 to all elementary schools

And

you are eliminating busing to centers when there is a local level 4, then aren't you eliminating all AAP busing to all centers?

So, what is the point of having centers?

why would you say you are eliminating busing to center "IF there is a local level 4" since according to the other term, all ESs will have local level 4. Why the "if" -- it seems as though there would be few centers if there is no busing at all.

+1
If LLIV is offered at all schools, then centers should be a thing of the past.

They want to put level IV in all schools, but won't be able to. It think maybe 5 kids qualified at my kids' base school. They won't put level IV in those schools, so the center that school feeds into will stay open until there starts to be a critical mass at the base school. That's where the if comes in. They are required to prdivide gifted services and they've chosen level IV as the method so if they only offer it at centers for some kids, they will have to bus those kids. They don't have to bus the ones who have it at the base school. There should be no option to drive your kid to a center if you have local level IV. That would significantly simplify the process. Hopefully at some point there will be a critical mass at all school, and centers will be a thing of the past.

Anonymous wrote:Since TJ is a center, will this busing also be eliminated. Are magnet ES schools being eliminated?

TJ isn't an ES, so busing would not be eliminated (neither would it be for MSs, like Thoreau & Franklin) with local programs.

Anonymous wrote:"screening" may be required, but what if they "screened" by using the current tests and then just let the AART and teachers at the school take (a) any kid who meets a certain cut off (like 135) and then the teachers/aart can fill out the rest of the class with any other kids who have been referred and have a high score or any kids they think might fit in. Isn't that what happens now with local level 4? Principals can fill out the class with good students who weren't officially designated "AAP."

My point is -- they could still "screen" in multiple ways without going through the whole committee review process. They would simply make the assignment to the level 4 class a much more local decision.

Screening and selection by a committee is required by Virginia. So is an appeals process through the committee. So is a separate advisorary committee which includes parents of gifted students that helps to evaluate and structure each district"s gifted program and policies. All of these are mandated by the state. The districts submit a plan for gifted screening, identification, appeals processes, and the actual program which must be approved by the state (and based off recommendations from the advisory committee).

Fairfax County Public Schools cannot just waive a wand and poof! AAP as we know it disappears. They might be able to tighten up identification and do away with busses. They might be able to make some ot those McLean/Vienna type areas with the huge critical mass all LLIV with no centers, but they are not going to be able to simply eliminate centers and AAP completely as you wish.