Of course you can game it. PTA president's children always get into the advanced classes. etc. Teachers pet gets moved up. The distracted genius does not. Testing is actually less subjective.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS's general ed program now caters to special ed and ESOL students. Unfortunately "gifted" is regular ed in many other districts.

I’m an outsider just reading about AAP here. I have to say, this is what it seems like to me. Seems like a colossal waste of money.

They actually did a study on whether or not to get rid of AAP level IV and one year it was about $2 million. Another year the cost was zero. The only extra cost other than testing is the bussing and that ended up amounting to a wash.

They could get rid of the testing and they could get rid of the Advanced Academic Resource teachers which both cost money, however those serve many children beyond just the LLIV program.

I keep saying this. All classes should be AAP. Spend the money on the testing process to find and train the best teachers. This way you can group kids based on their academic needs as determined by a placement test each year (school-specific) with the top kids getting "genius" level classes and the lowest being at the current gen-ed level.

You just contradicted your statement!

Does she mean schools? All schools should be LLIV?

There are a lot of LL-IV schools in FCPS. However, some areas have only 5-10 identified students for AAP, that they feel need the higher level courses. The center system is to address this. Some schools end up becoming LL-IV due to the high numbers they end up sending to the center. If your local elementary isn't LLIV, you didn't qualify for the center, have the lovely comforting thought that all of this is moot by the time they get to high school.

I believe she is suggesting we test all of the children, separate them by ability, and place them in classrooms based on the advanced academic status...

OP here.. Yes. Not all kids excel in everything. So a kid who's exceptional in math may be at the highest level class but if he/she shows no interest in reading, they will be in the lowest level class for reading. Based on how kids perform each year, they get placed in the appropriate class section for the next year. You can "prep" your way into this but can't game the system since it is constantly changing. Everyone benefits and no more whining.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS's general ed program now caters to special ed and ESOL students. Unfortunately "gifted" is regular ed in many other districts.

I’m an outsider just reading about AAP here. I have to say, this is what it seems like to me. Seems like a colossal waste of money.

They actually did a study on whether or not to get rid of AAP level IV and one year it was about $2 million. Another year the cost was zero. The only extra cost other than testing is the bussing and that ended up amounting to a wash.

They could get rid of the testing and they could get rid of the Advanced Academic Resource teachers which both cost money, however those serve many children beyond just the LLIV program.

I keep saying this. All classes should be AAP. Spend the money on the testing process to find and train the best teachers. This way you can group kids based on their academic needs as determined by a placement test each year (school-specific) with the top kids getting "genius" level classes and the lowest being at the current gen-ed level.

You just contradicted your statement!

Does she mean schools? All schools should be LLIV?

There are a lot of LL-IV schools in FCPS. However, some areas have only 5-10 identified students for AAP, that they feel need the higher level courses. The center system is to address this. Some schools end up becoming LL-IV due to the high numbers they end up sending to the center. If your local elementary isn't LLIV, you didn't qualify for the center, have the lovely comforting thought that all of this is moot by the time they get to high school.

I believe she is suggesting we test all of the children, separate them by ability, and place them in classrooms based on the advanced academic status...

Isn't what FCPS currently doing via NNAT/COGAT?

No. They test all students (which not all school districts do), but they don't use those scores to have high, middle, and low classes. Instead, in gen ed, the goal is to mix the learner's in each classroom.

I think PP wants to use achievement or placement tests rather than CogAT/NNAT.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS's general ed program now caters to special ed and ESOL students. Unfortunately "gifted" is regular ed in many other districts.

I’m an outsider just reading about AAP here. I have to say, this is what it seems like to me. Seems like a colossal waste of money.

They actually did a study on whether or not to get rid of AAP level IV and one year it was about $2 million. Another year the cost was zero. The only extra cost other than testing is the bussing and that ended up amounting to a wash.

They could get rid of the testing and they could get rid of the Advanced Academic Resource teachers which both cost money, however those serve many children beyond just the LLIV program.

I keep saying this. All classes should be AAP. Spend the money on the testing process to find and train the best teachers. This way you can group kids based on their academic needs as determined by a placement test each year (school-specific) with the top kids getting "genius" level classes and the lowest being at the current gen-ed level.

You just contradicted your statement!

Does she mean schools? All schools should be LLIV?

There are a lot of LL-IV schools in FCPS. However, some areas have only 5-10 identified students for AAP, that they feel need the higher level courses. The center system is to address this. Some schools end up becoming LL-IV due to the high numbers they end up sending to the center. If your local elementary isn't LLIV, you didn't qualify for the center, have the lovely comforting thought that all of this is moot by the time they get to high school.

I believe she is suggesting we test all of the children, separate them by ability, and place them in classrooms based on the advanced academic status...

Isn't what FCPS currently doing via NNAT/COGAT?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DC1 is gifted by Davidson's standards and scored in the upper 140 at the nnat and cogat. He's not in anyway harmed by the high % of AAP kids admitted. I also don't believe that every class should be AAP - he's 2 years ahead in math and it would be unfair to force anyone to do math at that pace if not ready.

How is he 2 years ahead in math? Did he skip a grade in math? Does your AAP center regroup the kids for math in AAP?

There are some children who are in AAP who are accelerated this way. I have one DC whose strength is math. We moved to public school in his 3rd grade year and after some testing the AAP teacher moved him into the 4th grade AAP math class. He has continued that pattern ever since so is 2 grades ahead.

I think that even in AAP classes they differentiate. The literature circles will have books from a little above grade level to 6th-8th grade reading levels. Kids are then placed in the different groups. Children who excel more in history are provided chances to do extra credit on battles etc.

Anonymous wrote:My DC1 is gifted by Davidson's standards and scored in the upper 140 at the nnat and cogat. He's not in anyway harmed by the high % of AAP kids admitted. I also don't believe that every class should be AAP - he's 2 years ahead in math and it would be unfair to force anyone to do math at that pace if not ready.

How is he 2 years ahead in math? Did he skip a grade in math? Does your AAP center regroup the kids for math in AAP?

My DC1 is gifted by Davidson's standards and scored in the upper 140 at the nnat and cogat. He's not in anyway harmed by the high % of AAP kids admitted. I also don't believe that every class should be AAP - he's 2 years ahead in math and it would be unfair to force anyone to do math at that pace if not ready.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS's general ed program now caters to special ed and ESOL students. Unfortunately "gifted" is regular ed in many other districts.

I’m an outsider just reading about AAP here. I have to say, this is what it seems like to me. Seems like a colossal waste of money.

They actually did a study on whether or not to get rid of AAP level IV and one year it was about $2 million. Another year the cost was zero. The only extra cost other than testing is the bussing and that ended up amounting to a wash.

They could get rid of the testing and they could get rid of the Advanced Academic Resource teachers which both cost money, however those serve many children beyond just the LLIV program.

I keep saying this. All classes should be AAP. Spend the money on the testing process to find and train the best teachers. This way you can group kids based on their academic needs as determined by a placement test each year (school-specific) with the top kids getting "genius" level classes and the lowest being at the current gen-ed level.

You just contradicted your statement!

Does she mean schools? All schools should be LLIV?

There are a lot of LL-IV schools in FCPS. However, some areas have only 5-10 identified students for AAP, that they feel need the higher level courses. The center system is to address this. Some schools end up becoming LL-IV due to the high numbers they end up sending to the center. If your local elementary isn't LLIV, you didn't qualify for the center, have the lovely comforting thought that all of this is moot by the time they get to high school.

I believe she is suggesting we test all of the children, separate them by ability, and place them in classrooms based on the advanced academic status...

Our school had 85 kids in second grade and 11 went to the center. About 25% FARMs, no FARMs kids went to AAP .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS's general ed program now caters to special ed and ESOL students. Unfortunately "gifted" is regular ed in many other districts.

I’m an outsider just reading about AAP here. I have to say, this is what it seems like to me. Seems like a colossal waste of money.

They actually did a study on whether or not to get rid of AAP level IV and one year it was about $2 million. Another year the cost was zero. The only extra cost other than testing is the bussing and that ended up amounting to a wash.

They could get rid of the testing and they could get rid of the Advanced Academic Resource teachers which both cost money, however those serve many children beyond just the LLIV program.

I keep saying this. All classes should be AAP. Spend the money on the testing process to find and train the best teachers. This way you can group kids based on their academic needs as determined by a placement test each year (school-specific) with the top kids getting "genius" level classes and the lowest being at the current gen-ed level.

You just contradicted your statement!

Does she mean schools? All schools should be LLIV?

There are a lot of LL-IV schools in FCPS. However, some areas have only 5-10 identified students for AAP, that they feel need the higher level courses. The center system is to address this. Some schools end up becoming LL-IV due to the high numbers they end up sending to the center. If your local elementary isn't LLIV, you didn't qualify for the center, have the lovely comforting thought that all of this is moot by the time they get to high school.

^. The 19% figure doesn't seem to include the children who were found eligible for level IV but chose to defer placement. I wonder what the total percent of level IV eligible students is, including those who chose to remain in gen ed.

Here are some statistics if any one is interested

http://www.fcag.org/documents/AAP_Class_Size_Analysis.pdf

No one is supposed to be special. There are just different programs for different people.

If everyone is special, then no one is special.