Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again. I made a suggestion about integrating lunch and recess as an example because someone asked me to give a suggestion. I asked for reasons why to or why not to implement this and no one wrote in to say there would be a problem. People did write back saying it would help AAP and general ed integration, so without any problem noted, I came to the conclusion that this is something FCPS can integrate into all schools. I'm looking for more suggestions like this that can help fix the current situation especially at the schools where there are problems. I don't need to be the author of the suggestions though.

Have you seriously read any of the responses on this thread? Or only the ones that parroted what you said?

Plenty of posters shared logistical reasons why open lunch time and seating based off grade would NOT work. Reasons given by many posters included cafeteria size, time and logistic constraints, most schools not having mixed homerooms in the middle of the day, and several other reasons.

Very few people said open lunch seating was a practical idea that should be implemented distric wide. In fact, most of the posts advocating open lunch times were by you alone.

I didn't write in advocating for the mixed lunch other than making the suggestion and describing how it would help AAP and general ed students. Someone wrote in that their school had 1000 students and it worked, so that negated the one poster who thought cafeteria size was an issue. I think there is only one elementary at 1000 students and the rest are all smaller, often much smaller. Others also wrote in that the AAP students mixed and the general ed students mixed and they all ate at the same time but just separately. I don't see the logistical challenge in those classrooms mixing. Specials are often in the middle of the day and all schools now mix for them, so why would mixing for lunch and recess pose a problem? There is no academic issue to deal with. Right now a good number of center and LLIV schools mix for lunch and recess. Some of them don't but it's more likely that they don't because there has been no pressure to do so. Not because of a logistical challenge. If there are any, maybe FCPS could ask them to do something else to help with integration, but it just seems like more schools could mix based on the feedback given.

One poster saying her huge school mixes lunch does not negate all the other posters saying it wpuld not work at their schools.

The schools are not universal, not in size, student body, parenting types, achievement and certainly not building size/cafeterias.

NP here. I think what's clear is that some of you do not want AAP and Gen Ed kids to mix. At all. Not at lunch, not at recess, not in a box, not with a fox. There is NO reason they can't mix in a homeroom setting, where that class goes together on field trips, sits together at lunch or assemblies, has library time, class parties, etc. When class lists come out each August, Gen Ed and AAP kids should be placed in mixed homerooms. They switch anyway for core subjects, so I'm absolutely not seeing why this isn't going to work.

You might as well simply say, "We don't want our AAP kids mixing with your Gen Ed kids, period," because every nonsensical roadblock you continue to throw out makes this fact abundantly clear.

You are being too sensitive and only seeing what you want to see.

I am the poster you are responding too.

I, along with many, many other AAP parents, have repeatedly posted that at our kids' centers, gen ed and AAP kids happily mix for specials, recess, field trips and after school activities.

PP for whatever reason is fixated on lunch. And only lunch. And for whatever strange reason, she can't understand what many posters keep saying (including me and at both our base school and center) mixing kids in a special homeroom during the lunch hour so that all kids can have open lunch seating during lunch simply is not practical at many (if not most) fcps elementary schools. The cafeterias are too small. They are trying to schedule lunch for, in some cases, 40-50 classes, while allowing enough time for everyone to get through the lunch line, kindergarteners to have a reasonable, middle of the day time, with lunches running between 10:15-2:30 in some cases, all while maximizing instructional time.

And yet OP keeps fixating on mixing lunch as the grand solution to hurt feelings of parents about AAP and as the means to improve the academics of gen ed throughout fcps, while other parents like you are filled with rage that others suggest that having an organized lunch by class is not a grand master plan by fcps to exalt AAP kids and stomp down gen ed kids.

This thread has gone page after page of OP arguing that if we only combine lunch then everyone on dcum AAP forum will feel vindicated that gen ed, is indeed, important to fcps, and only complete agreement by every last AAP parent that lunch should indeed be the priority will show that AAP parents are not complete monsters with bratty stupidly average spawn.

It is hilariously ridiculous to put it kindly.

OP here. That is totally untrue. You are constantly just trying to tear people down with the same rhetoric. You say the same thing over and over and all I get from your comments are that you want the status quo. You have absolutely no suggestions for improvement and just want to argue. You don't want change. That's fine. Others do.

I've told you over and over the lunch suggestion was ONE suggestion to start with and I did it at the request of a poster to list one. I then tried to end the lunch discussion after many others responded by asking if we could agree that some center schools, not all, could implement mixed lunch and then tried to MOVE ON to a different topic asking people about HOW TO IMPROVE LEVEL 2 AND 3 SERVICES since that had already come up as a concern. That went nowhere because you kept arguing about how I was on some sort of mission to implement my own changes despite me saying that our school did not have any AAP general ed problems and kept bringing up the lunch thing again and again.

From the start I asked for other's proposed changes because we are not at a center and I was just hoping to end some of this bickering on DCUM and bring up FCPS's reputation. But instead I got one-sided venting or arguing and name calling. People saying to others stuff like You. Just.Don't.Get.It. as if we can't understand each other's viewpoints. There's no way to come to a mutual decision if everyone just gives their own perspective and doesn't give the perspective of the other side. For some reason, most people don't know how to argue properly anymore. In order to arrive at any consensus you have to be able to discuss the counter argument and consider other's viewpoints. Then through discussion you often arrive at a mutual compromise. That's all I'm looking for. If you have a story of your own you want to share as well, fine, but this thread was about helping AAP and general ed together therefore any argument to me should tell the perspective of the proposed change from both sides.

The last comment I made was to step back and LIST WHAT THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS WITH AAP AND GENERAL ED are because people were having a hard time coming up with new suggestions since they only knew their own school well. I figured if we had a goal and problems listed then that would at least be a start to improving the situation. The goal was provided by someone else, I added on to it and then asked if the goal was worthwhile to which I also got no response. If there is a mutual goal and set of problems listed by the DCUM community, then it could more easily be discussed at the school level if the change only pertained to some schools. Others could be brought up at a school board public hearing to get a wider perspective. The suggestion to make a list of problems also went nowhere again because of your obstructionist attitude. In 24 pages, you have made zero suggestions for how to improve AAP and general ed. Why don't you come up with a suggestion of your own instead of just being here to try to insult others? If you have no suggestions and just want to keep the status quo, just say that and move on. Your presence would probably be better served on the Sound off if you think AAP is BS thread which is doing a pretty good job of tearing down AAP. It could use some AAP supporters who want to keep the status quo.

You don't know what I have posted or suggested, and that there are certainly several posters besides me who said mixing lunch will not work at their particular schools.

You also don't know if I have kids currently in AAP level IV or not. In fact, my kids who are in elementary grade are all not in AAP. In fact, one kid was in the (gasp) just outside of the cut off group of kids that posters on dcum seem to claim are universally shunned and maligned by fcps and other AAP kids.

We do know which posts are your posts, for the most part. And based off your posts, you don't want solutions., only agreement.

Anyone who has a different experience at their school or a positive experience with AAP or who has suggestions that do not involve complete elimination of AAP or complete combining of AAP with general ed is dismissed by you and a few others as invalid, unworthy of discussion, and as a clear example of how awful AAP parents and kids are and that they only want complete segregation of AAP kids. The last, most common accusation is completely ludicrous, especially since poster after poster (including me whose AAP aged kids are all currently in gen ed) keeps stating that in our centers the kids mix for every logistically possble class and activity they can, while other posters post that their classes, AAP and gen ed, don't switch classes at all except for specials.

You don't want solutions. You just want agrrement, which is very clear the more you post.

Very much agree! The OP's posts and this thread are entirely contrived.

Anonymous wrote:Here are a couple potential solutions:

Level III could be standardized at base schools (schools with neither a Center nor a LLIV) by simply having one classroom in each subject area follow the AAP curriculum. So, if there are 5 classrooms per grade, and the kids are already ability grouped by subject, just have the top grouping be the level III program that follows the AAP curriculum in that subject. Sure, most general education kids couldn't necessarily handle the AAP curriculum, but the Level III kids who are strong in that subject area would be more than capable.

To eliminate having general education kids in the minority at center schools, it might be better to just redraw the district maps such that some schools are AAP only.

OP here. Thanks for putting out some ideas. I've seen some of this done and the it works often is that the teacher teaches like they would in a combination class where there are two different levels because there isn't always an exact number of kids at the same level in the classroom. I think they could definitely be considered by base schools. I'd love to hear more on what you think this change would accomplish.

Would you be willing to also write a counter argument to this and then write why your idea is better? It might flush out some details and help us understand the change better. If this thread achieves nothing more than people starting to argue their opinion while considering others viewpoints, that would be more success than I could hope for.

Here's an article to persuade why offering a counter argument is often better than a one-sided argument.
http://www.writingwithclarity.com/2011/07/are-one-sided-or-two-sided-arguments-more-persuasive/

Here are a couple potential solutions:

Level III could be standardized at base schools (schools with neither a Center nor a LLIV) by simply having one classroom in each subject area follow the AAP curriculum. So, if there are 5 classrooms per grade, and the kids are already ability grouped by subject, just have the top grouping be the level III program that follows the AAP curriculum in that subject. Sure, most general education kids couldn't necessarily handle the AAP curriculum, but the Level III kids who are strong in that subject area would be more than capable.

To eliminate having general education kids in the minority at center schools, it might be better to just redraw the district maps such that some schools are AAP only.

OP again. I have never discussed either of these options btw. You've mistaken me with someone else. Complete elimination of AAP or complete combining of AAP with general ed

OP here. That is entirely untrue again. I just thanked someone for posting a solution which I don't even agree with, but could consider if the right argument were brought forth. I even suggested a different committee handle it without my involvement at all. There are many solutions that we could be discussing including ones for AAP level 4 such as the ones recommended by FCAG and the advanced academic advisory committee which haven't been implemented, but instead of you discussing solutions, you just keep attacking. Keep attacking. Despite me even giving a goal and asking for feedback, you attack rather than discussing the goal or the problems or solutions.

PP, you seem to surmise everything about me. Why don't we hear from you about what you really want for change within FCPS's AAP and general ed programs?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again. I made a suggestion about integrating lunch and recess as an example because someone asked me to give a suggestion. I asked for reasons why to or why not to implement this and no one wrote in to say there would be a problem. People did write back saying it would help AAP and general ed integration, so without any problem noted, I came to the conclusion that this is something FCPS can integrate into all schools. I'm looking for more suggestions like this that can help fix the current situation especially at the schools where there are problems. I don't need to be the author of the suggestions though.

Have you seriously read any of the responses on this thread? Or only the ones that parroted what you said?

Plenty of posters shared logistical reasons why open lunch time and seating based off grade would NOT work. Reasons given by many posters included cafeteria size, time and logistic constraints, most schools not having mixed homerooms in the middle of the day, and several other reasons.

Very few people said open lunch seating was a practical idea that should be implemented distric wide. In fact, most of the posts advocating open lunch times were by you alone.

I didn't write in advocating for the mixed lunch other than making the suggestion and describing how it would help AAP and general ed students. Someone wrote in that their school had 1000 students and it worked, so that negated the one poster who thought cafeteria size was an issue. I think there is only one elementary at 1000 students and the rest are all smaller, often much smaller. Others also wrote in that the AAP students mixed and the general ed students mixed and they all ate at the same time but just separately. I don't see the logistical challenge in those classrooms mixing. Specials are often in the middle of the day and all schools now mix for them, so why would mixing for lunch and recess pose a problem? There is no academic issue to deal with. Right now a good number of center and LLIV schools mix for lunch and recess. Some of them don't but it's more likely that they don't because there has been no pressure to do so. Not because of a logistical challenge. If there are any, maybe FCPS could ask them to do something else to help with integration, but it just seems like more schools could mix based on the feedback given.

One poster saying her huge school mixes lunch does not negate all the other posters saying it wpuld not work at their schools.

The schools are not universal, not in size, student body, parenting types, achievement and certainly not building size/cafeterias.

NP here. I think what's clear is that some of you do not want AAP and Gen Ed kids to mix. At all. Not at lunch, not at recess, not in a box, not with a fox. There is NO reason they can't mix in a homeroom setting, where that class goes together on field trips, sits together at lunch or assemblies, has library time, class parties, etc. When class lists come out each August, Gen Ed and AAP kids should be placed in mixed homerooms. They switch anyway for core subjects, so I'm absolutely not seeing why this isn't going to work.

You might as well simply say, "We don't want our AAP kids mixing with your Gen Ed kids, period," because every nonsensical roadblock you continue to throw out makes this fact abundantly clear.

You are being too sensitive and only seeing what you want to see.

I am the poster you are responding too.

I, along with many, many other AAP parents, have repeatedly posted that at our kids' centers, gen ed and AAP kids happily mix for specials, recess, field trips and after school activities.

PP for whatever reason is fixated on lunch. And only lunch. And for whatever strange reason, she can't understand what many posters keep saying (including me and at both our base school and center) mixing kids in a special homeroom during the lunch hour so that all kids can have open lunch seating during lunch simply is not practical at many (if not most) fcps elementary schools. The cafeterias are too small. They are trying to schedule lunch for, in some cases, 40-50 classes, while allowing enough time for everyone to get through the lunch line, kindergarteners to have a reasonable, middle of the day time, with lunches running between 10:15-2:30 in some cases, all while maximizing instructional time.

And yet OP keeps fixating on mixing lunch as the grand solution to hurt feelings of parents about AAP and as the means to improve the academics of gen ed throughout fcps, while other parents like you are filled with rage that others suggest that having an organized lunch by class is not a grand master plan by fcps to exalt AAP kids and stomp down gen ed kids.

This thread has gone page after page of OP arguing that if we only combine lunch then everyone on dcum AAP forum will feel vindicated that gen ed, is indeed, important to fcps, and only complete agreement by every last AAP parent that lunch should indeed be the priority will show that AAP parents are not complete monsters with bratty stupidly average spawn.

It is hilariously ridiculous to put it kindly.

OP here. That is totally untrue. You are constantly just trying to tear people down with the same rhetoric. You say the same thing over and over and all I get from your comments are that you want the status quo. You have absolutely no suggestions for improvement and just want to argue. You don't want change. That's fine. Others do.

I've told you over and over the lunch suggestion was ONE suggestion to start with and I did it at the request of a poster to list one. I then tried to end the lunch discussion after many others responded by asking if we could agree that some center schools, not all, could implement mixed lunch and then tried to MOVE ON to a different topic asking people about HOW TO IMPROVE LEVEL 2 AND 3 SERVICES since that had already come up as a concern. That went nowhere because you kept arguing about how I was on some sort of mission to implement my own changes despite me saying that our school did not have any AAP general ed problems and kept bringing up the lunch thing again and again.

From the start I asked for other's proposed changes because we are not at a center and I was just hoping to end some of this bickering on DCUM and bring up FCPS's reputation. But instead I got one-sided venting or arguing and name calling. People saying to others stuff like You. Just.Don't.Get.It. as if we can't understand each other's viewpoints. There's no way to come to a mutual decision if everyone just gives their own perspective and doesn't give the perspective of the other side. For some reason, most people don't know how to argue properly anymore. In order to arrive at any consensus you have to be able to discuss the counter argument and consider other's viewpoints. Then through discussion you often arrive at a mutual compromise. That's all I'm looking for. If you have a story of your own you want to share as well, fine, but this thread was about helping AAP and general ed together therefore any argument to me should tell the perspective of the proposed change from both sides.

The last comment I made was to step back and LIST WHAT THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS WITH AAP AND GENERAL ED are because people were having a hard time coming up with new suggestions since they only knew their own school well. I figured if we had a goal and problems listed then that would at least be a start to improving the situation. The goal was provided by someone else, I added on to it and then asked if the goal was worthwhile to which I also got no response. If there is a mutual goal and set of problems listed by the DCUM community, then it could more easily be discussed at the school level if the change only pertained to some schools. Others could be brought up at a school board public hearing to get a wider perspective. The suggestion to make a list of problems also went nowhere again because of your obstructionist attitude. In 24 pages, you have made zero suggestions for how to improve AAP and general ed. Why don't you come up with a suggestion of your own instead of just being here to try to insult others? If you have no suggestions and just want to keep the status quo, just say that and move on. Your presence would probably be better served on the Sound off if you think AAP is BS thread which is doing a pretty good job of tearing down AAP. It could use some AAP supporters who want to keep the status quo.

You don't know what I have posted or suggested, and that there are certainly several posters besides me who said mixing lunch will not work at their particular schools.

You also don't know if I have kids currently in AAP level IV or not. In fact, my kids who are in elementary grade are all not in AAP. In fact, one kid was in the (gasp) just outside of the cut off group of kids that posters on dcum seem to claim are universally shunned and maligned by fcps and other AAP kids.

We do know which posts are your posts, for the most part. And based off your posts, you don't want solutions., only agreement.

Anyone who has a different experience at their school or a positive experience with AAP or who has suggestions that do not involve complete elimination of AAP or complete combining of AAP with general ed is dismissed by you and a few others as invalid, unworthy of discussion, and as a clear example of how awful AAP parents and kids are and that they only want complete segregation of AAP kids. The last, most common accusation is completely ludicrous, especially since poster after poster (including me whose AAP aged kids are all currently in gen ed) keeps stating that in our centers the kids mix for every logistically possble class and activity they can, while other posters post that their classes, AAP and gen ed, don't switch classes at all except for specials.

You don't want solutions. You just want agrrement, which is very clear the more you post.

OP here. You are correct in part, but I put that in as part of the goal, so it wasn't a secret. I am only responding to others who want more integration or at least more compatibility and also want more enrichment for their AAP students and more enrichment for their general ed students. It's been said over and over for years. Why would I care that much since both my kids are in AAP except that others have posted their frustration? To me their frustration actually poses problems for the future of AAP. I don't really understand why others think they can just put their head in the sand and think the program will continue as the status quo. From the beginning I said our school integrates well, enriches well across levels, and that dissipates the frustration between AAP and general ed. I keep reading that other schools don't so was trying to work towards solutions for those schools and improvements at ours where possible.

There is no single solution however. Schools are different and some solutions will work for some schools and other solutions work for others. But like with the combined classroom recommendations that FCPS puts out, they are guidelines that schools should consider when implementing those programs with built in flexibility. I think the guidelines for AAP center schools should be refined and added on to as clearly there are things not working in them.


The goal I put forth was "Meet the needs of the student in the program they are receiving services from in the building where it is a best fit for them. Each building should promote school unity and treat all students within it in an equitable manner." Do you disagree with this goal?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you're going to make a suggestion, I just ask that you give at least anecdotal evidence that shows support for both general ed and AAP. Sorry if that was confusing.

Meet the needs of the student in the program they are receiving services from in the building where it is a best fit for them.

So then, Gen Ed kids who attend centers should be given the choice of attending a different base school that is not a center. Fair is fair, right?

In some cases, why not? If a child's mental or emotional health is truly jeopardized by being outnumbered by AAP kids, it's an issue worthy of a solution. If allowing such a move also relieves some of the parental friction at the center, all the better.

There has not been one person who has disagreed with this suggestion, AAP or non AAP.

OP here. Great. A suggestion to allow base school center kids to go to a different school. I appreciate that you are trying to offer solutions. I think this could help some general ed students and hurt others. I don't really see it affecting AAP kids too much. The only problem I see with this suggestion is that it possibly creates issues for FCPS with boundaries and bussing. Even if they could move, base schools are allowed to have LLIV programs, so would that always solve the issue? Would they always have enough space? I don't know. I would hope that instead of trying to separate AAP and general ed further, that the programs could be more integrated which was the whole reason I started this thread. Also, some parents want to have level 2 and 3 AAP integrated more with level IV students, so separating AAP and general ed further could backfire and those students could get less enrichment than they do now. It's worth bringing up to the school board though if the AAP parents and principals won't agree to make any changes at center schools for the level 2 and 3 students and general ed students.

Are level 2 and 3 students considered AAP or general ed? FCAG and the advanced academic committee touches on them slightly but I mostly read about them here as part of general ed. I have two kids in level IV AAP so I don't know all of the issues within level 2 and level 3 instruction. I've heard enough people complain about it and can see the difference in curriculum myself, so I partially understand when they complain or request change.

One other suggestion I was going to make - I had been waiting till this group listed the problems (yes I have other suggestions besides integrated lunch and recess) would be to have a general education advisory committee. There is one for advanced academics, special education, title 1, minorities, etc. Why not have one for general ed? Their purpose could be to review the local plan for general education. That group could then put out a report of recommendations for the general education curriculum and between them and the advanced academic committee, there might be enough recommendations to help level 2 and level 3 academics. They could also make recommendations on boundary changes to help general ed populations at schools.

https://www.fcps.edu/search?keywords=committee

This is a very revealing post OP. It's clear that your vision of a single solution that helps both APP and Gen Ed involves their greater or total integration. You say so right in your post as bolded above. That's a perfectly valid opinion, so there's no point pretending that you have no ideal end in mind, even if many think it's not a winner. If you'd said this up front, it may have been a very different thread. Instead, you are picking apart others' comments which don't serve this unstated end. Again, this post is a good illustration. You sort of brush off the idea of allowing some Gen Ed kids to evacuate their center because you "don't really see it affecting AAP kids too much" Yet in the same post your propose a "Gen Ed Advisory Committee" which arguably would affect AAP kids even less. Again, nothing wrong with the idea but it doesn't quite fit the criteria you are expecting others to deliver for your review.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you're going to make a suggestion, I just ask that you give at least anecdotal evidence that shows support for both general ed and AAP. Sorry if that was confusing.

Meet the needs of the student in the program they are receiving services from in the building where it is a best fit for them.

So then, Gen Ed kids who attend centers should be given the choice of attending a different base school that is not a center. Fair is fair, right?

In some cases, why not? If a child's mental or emotional health is truly jeopardized by being outnumbered by AAP kids, it's an issue worthy of a solution. If allowing such a move also relieves some of the parental friction at the center, all the better.

There has not been one person who has disagreed with this suggestion, AAP or non AAP.

OP here. Great. A suggestion to allow base school center kids to go to a different school. I appreciate that you are trying to offer solutions. I think this could help some general ed students and hurt others. I don't really see it affecting AAP kids too much. The only problem I see with this suggestion is that it possibly creates issues for FCPS with boundaries and bussing. Even if they could move, base schools are allowed to have LLIV programs, so would that always solve the issue? Would they always have enough space? I don't know. I would hope that instead of trying to separate AAP and general ed further, that the programs could be more integrated which was the whole reason I started this thread. Also, some parents want to have level 2 and 3 AAP integrated more with level IV students, so separating AAP and general ed further could backfire and those students could get less enrichment than they do now. It's worth bringing up to the school board though if the AAP parents and principals won't agree to make any changes at center schools for the level 2 and 3 students and general ed students.

Are level 2 and 3 students considered AAP or general ed? FCAG and the advanced academic committee touches on them slightly but I mostly read about them here as part of general ed. I have two kids in level IV AAP so I don't know all of the issues within level 2 and level 3 instruction. I've heard enough people complain about it and can see the difference in curriculum myself, so I partially understand when they complain or request change.

One other suggestion I was going to make - I had been waiting till this group listed the problems (yes I have other suggestions besides integrated lunch and recess) would be to have a general education advisory committee. There is one for advanced academics, special education, title 1, minorities, etc. Why not have one for general ed? Their purpose could be to review the local plan for general education. That group could then put out a report of recommendations for the general education curriculum and between them and the advanced academic committee, there might be enough recommendations to help level 2 and level 3 academics. They could also make recommendations on boundary changes to help general ed populations at schools.

https://www.fcps.edu/search?keywords=committee

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again. I made a suggestion about integrating lunch and recess as an example because someone asked me to give a suggestion. I asked for reasons why to or why not to implement this and no one wrote in to say there would be a problem. People did write back saying it would help AAP and general ed integration, so without any problem noted, I came to the conclusion that this is something FCPS can integrate into all schools. I'm looking for more suggestions like this that can help fix the current situation especially at the schools where there are problems. I don't need to be the author of the suggestions though.

Have you seriously read any of the responses on this thread? Or only the ones that parroted what you said?

Plenty of posters shared logistical reasons why open lunch time and seating based off grade would NOT work. Reasons given by many posters included cafeteria size, time and logistic constraints, most schools not having mixed homerooms in the middle of the day, and several other reasons.

Very few people said open lunch seating was a practical idea that should be implemented distric wide. In fact, most of the posts advocating open lunch times were by you alone.

I didn't write in advocating for the mixed lunch other than making the suggestion and describing how it would help AAP and general ed students. Someone wrote in that their school had 1000 students and it worked, so that negated the one poster who thought cafeteria size was an issue. I think there is only one elementary at 1000 students and the rest are all smaller, often much smaller. Others also wrote in that the AAP students mixed and the general ed students mixed and they all ate at the same time but just separately. I don't see the logistical challenge in those classrooms mixing. Specials are often in the middle of the day and all schools now mix for them, so why would mixing for lunch and recess pose a problem? There is no academic issue to deal with. Right now a good number of center and LLIV schools mix for lunch and recess. Some of them don't but it's more likely that they don't because there has been no pressure to do so. Not because of a logistical challenge. If there are any, maybe FCPS could ask them to do something else to help with integration, but it just seems like more schools could mix based on the feedback given.

One poster saying her huge school mixes lunch does not negate all the other posters saying it wpuld not work at their schools.

The schools are not universal, not in size, student body, parenting types, achievement and certainly not building size/cafeterias.

NP here. I think what's clear is that some of you do not want AAP and Gen Ed kids to mix. At all. Not at lunch, not at recess, not in a box, not with a fox. There is NO reason they can't mix in a homeroom setting, where that class goes together on field trips, sits together at lunch or assemblies, has library time, class parties, etc. When class lists come out each August, Gen Ed and AAP kids should be placed in mixed homerooms. They switch anyway for core subjects, so I'm absolutely not seeing why this isn't going to work.

You might as well simply say, "We don't want our AAP kids mixing with your Gen Ed kids, period," because every nonsensical roadblock you continue to throw out makes this fact abundantly clear.

You are being too sensitive and only seeing what you want to see.

I am the poster you are responding too.

I, along with many, many other AAP parents, have repeatedly posted that at our kids' centers, gen ed and AAP kids happily mix for specials, recess, field trips and after school activities.

PP for whatever reason is fixated on lunch. And only lunch. And for whatever strange reason, she can't understand what many posters keep saying (including me and at both our base school and center) mixing kids in a special homeroom during the lunch hour so that all kids can have open lunch seating during lunch simply is not practical at many (if not most) fcps elementary schools. The cafeterias are too small. They are trying to schedule lunch for, in some cases, 40-50 classes, while allowing enough time for everyone to get through the lunch line, kindergarteners to have a reasonable, middle of the day time, with lunches running between 10:15-2:30 in some cases, all while maximizing instructional time.

And yet OP keeps fixating on mixing lunch as the grand solution to hurt feelings of parents about AAP and as the means to improve the academics of gen ed throughout fcps, while other parents like you are filled with rage that others suggest that having an organized lunch by class is not a grand master plan by fcps to exalt AAP kids and stomp down gen ed kids.

This thread has gone page after page of OP arguing that if we only combine lunch then everyone on dcum AAP forum will feel vindicated that gen ed, is indeed, important to fcps, and only complete agreement by every last AAP parent that lunch should indeed be the priority will show that AAP parents are not complete monsters with bratty stupidly average spawn.

It is hilariously ridiculous to put it kindly.

OP here. That is totally untrue. You are constantly just trying to tear people down with the same rhetoric. You say the same thing over and over and all I get from your comments are that you want the status quo. You have absolutely no suggestions for improvement and just want to argue. You don't want change. That's fine. Others do.

I've told you over and over the lunch suggestion was ONE suggestion to start with and I did it at the request of a poster to list one. I then tried to end the lunch discussion after many others responded by asking if we could agree that some center schools, not all, could implement mixed lunch and then tried to MOVE ON to a different topic asking people about HOW TO IMPROVE LEVEL 2 AND 3 SERVICES since that had already come up as a concern. That went nowhere because you kept arguing about how I was on some sort of mission to implement my own changes despite me saying that our school did not have any AAP general ed problems and kept bringing up the lunch thing again and again.

From the start I asked for other's proposed changes because we are not at a center and I was just hoping to end some of this bickering on DCUM and bring up FCPS's reputation. But instead I got one-sided venting or arguing and name calling. People saying to others stuff like You. Just.Don't.Get.It. as if we can't understand each other's viewpoints. There's no way to come to a mutual decision if everyone just gives their own perspective and doesn't give the perspective of the other side. For some reason, most people don't know how to argue properly anymore. In order to arrive at any consensus you have to be able to discuss the counter argument and consider other's viewpoints. Then through discussion you often arrive at a mutual compromise. That's all I'm looking for. If you have a story of your own you want to share as well, fine, but this thread was about helping AAP and general ed together therefore any argument to me should tell the perspective of the proposed change from both sides.

The last comment I made was to step back and LIST WHAT THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS WITH AAP AND GENERAL ED are because people were having a hard time coming up with new suggestions since they only knew their own school well. I figured if we had a goal and problems listed then that would at least be a start to improving the situation. The goal was provided by someone else, I added on to it and then asked if the goal was worthwhile to which I also got no response. If there is a mutual goal and set of problems listed by the DCUM community, then it could more easily be discussed at the school level if the change only pertained to some schools. Others could be brought up at a school board public hearing to get a wider perspective. The suggestion to make a list of problems also went nowhere again because of your obstructionist attitude. In 24 pages, you have made zero suggestions for how to improve AAP and general ed. Why don't you come up with a suggestion of your own instead of just being here to try to insult others? If you have no suggestions and just want to keep the status quo, just say that and move on. Your presence would probably be better served on the Sound off if you think AAP is BS thread which is doing a pretty good job of tearing down AAP. It could use some AAP supporters who want to keep the status quo.

There are pages after pages of OP insisting that every school needs mixed homerooms so the kids can eat lunch together.

Even when posters say their schools do not mix any classes but specials.

Even whe posters say their school does not do homerooms, just a ten minute morning meeting.

Even when posters say it will not work at their schools because of cafeteria size, lunch scheduling, and whem their kids go to lunch (often in the middle of core classes, which are classes like math and English)

Even when posters say the only way to do this at their kids schools because this would involve adding a special, non instructional socialization period that does not currently exist and which would take away from instructional time.

Even when repeated posters have said that their centers mix the kids at every non core opportunity, such as field trips, specials, clubs, heck, even sex ed.

Even when repeated posters have said their centers do not have the same segregation and drama of the TJ feeder schools.

Lunch.

Yes lunch.

Page after page of lunch.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you're going to make a suggestion, I just ask that you give at least anecdotal evidence that shows support for both general ed and AAP. Sorry if that was confusing.

Meet the needs of the student in the program they are receiving services from in the building where it is a best fit for them.

So then, Gen Ed kids who attend centers should be given the choice of attending a different base school that is not a center. Fair is fair, right?

In some cases, why not? If a child's mental or emotional health is truly jeopardized by being outnumbered by AAP kids, it's an issue worthy of a solution. If allowing such a move also relieves some of the parental friction at the center, all the better.

Wait a minute. Is that the calculus used to determine which AAP kids get to leave their base school for the center? Of course not! They're given the option to go, and certainly don't need to produce evidence that their "mental or emotional health is truly jeopardized" at the base school. Why on earth would you suggest Gen Ed kids need to jump through psychological hoops to be afforded the same choices? Give me a break.

Either all kids should be given this choice, or none of them should. End of story.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again. I made a suggestion about integrating lunch and recess as an example because someone asked me to give a suggestion. I asked for reasons why to or why not to implement this and no one wrote in to say there would be a problem. People did write back saying it would help AAP and general ed integration, so without any problem noted, I came to the conclusion that this is something FCPS can integrate into all schools. I'm looking for more suggestions like this that can help fix the current situation especially at the schools where there are problems. I don't need to be the author of the suggestions though.

Have you seriously read any of the responses on this thread? Or only the ones that parroted what you said?

Plenty of posters shared logistical reasons why open lunch time and seating based off grade would NOT work. Reasons given by many posters included cafeteria size, time and logistic constraints, most schools not having mixed homerooms in the middle of the day, and several other reasons.

Very few people said open lunch seating was a practical idea that should be implemented distric wide. In fact, most of the posts advocating open lunch times were by you alone.

I didn't write in advocating for the mixed lunch other than making the suggestion and describing how it would help AAP and general ed students. Someone wrote in that their school had 1000 students and it worked, so that negated the one poster who thought cafeteria size was an issue. I think there is only one elementary at 1000 students and the rest are all smaller, often much smaller. Others also wrote in that the AAP students mixed and the general ed students mixed and they all ate at the same time but just separately. I don't see the logistical challenge in those classrooms mixing. Specials are often in the middle of the day and all schools now mix for them, so why would mixing for lunch and recess pose a problem? There is no academic issue to deal with. Right now a good number of center and LLIV schools mix for lunch and recess. Some of them don't but it's more likely that they don't because there has been no pressure to do so. Not because of a logistical challenge. If there are any, maybe FCPS could ask them to do something else to help with integration, but it just seems like more schools could mix based on the feedback given.

One poster saying her huge school mixes lunch does not negate all the other posters saying it wpuld not work at their schools.

The schools are not universal, not in size, student body, parenting types, achievement and certainly not building size/cafeterias.

NP here. I think what's clear is that some of you do not want AAP and Gen Ed kids to mix. At all. Not at lunch, not at recess, not in a box, not with a fox. There is NO reason they can't mix in a homeroom setting, where that class goes together on field trips, sits together at lunch or assemblies, has library time, class parties, etc. When class lists come out each August, Gen Ed and AAP kids should be placed in mixed homerooms. They switch anyway for core subjects, so I'm absolutely not seeing why this isn't going to work.

You might as well simply say, "We don't want our AAP kids mixing with your Gen Ed kids, period," because every nonsensical roadblock you continue to throw out makes this fact abundantly clear.

You are being too sensitive and only seeing what you want to see.

I am the poster you are responding too.

I, along with many, many other AAP parents, have repeatedly posted that at our kids' centers, gen ed and AAP kids happily mix for specials, recess, field trips and after school activities.

PP for whatever reason is fixated on lunch. And only lunch. And for whatever strange reason, she can't understand what many posters keep saying (including me and at both our base school and center) mixing kids in a special homeroom during the lunch hour so that all kids can have open lunch seating during lunch simply is not practical at many (if not most) fcps elementary schools. The cafeterias are too small. They are trying to schedule lunch for, in some cases, 40-50 classes, while allowing enough time for everyone to get through the lunch line, kindergarteners to have a reasonable, middle of the day time, with lunches running between 10:15-2:30 in some cases, all while maximizing instructional time.

And yet OP keeps fixating on mixing lunch as the grand solution to hurt feelings of parents about AAP and as the means to improve the academics of gen ed throughout fcps, while other parents like you are filled with rage that others suggest that having an organized lunch by class is not a grand master plan by fcps to exalt AAP kids and stomp down gen ed kids.

This thread has gone page after page of OP arguing that if we only combine lunch then everyone on dcum AAP forum will feel vindicated that gen ed, is indeed, important to fcps, and only complete agreement by every last AAP parent that lunch should indeed be the priority will show that AAP parents are not complete monsters with bratty stupidly average spawn.

It is hilariously ridiculous to put it kindly.

I think you're confused. No one is advocating a "special lunch only homeroom." That's hilariously ridiculous. What several posters have said is that kids need to be placed in a mixed homeroom from the get-go - one in which they do everything non-core (field trips, assemblies, class parties, special projects, recess, and YES: LUNCH). What I find absolutely bizarre is this insistence on twisting that very simple concept into a "lunch-only homeroom." WTF?? Surely this can't be so very difficult to comprehend?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you're going to make a suggestion, I just ask that you give at least anecdotal evidence that shows support for both general ed and AAP. Sorry if that was confusing.

Meet the needs of the student in the program they are receiving services from in the building where it is a best fit for them.

So then, Gen Ed kids who attend centers should be given the choice of attending a different base school that is not a center. Fair is fair, right?

In some cases, why not? If a child's mental or emotional health is truly jeopardized by being outnumbered by AAP kids, it's an issue worthy of a solution. If allowing such a move also relieves some of the parental friction at the center, all the better.

There has not been one person who has disagreed with this suggestion, AAP or non AAP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you're going to make a suggestion, I just ask that you give at least anecdotal evidence that shows support for both general ed and AAP. Sorry if that was confusing.

Meet the needs of the student in the program they are receiving services from in the building where it is a best fit for them.

So then, Gen Ed kids who attend centers should be given the choice of attending a different base school that is not a center. Fair is fair, right?

In some cases, why not? If a child's mental or emotional health is truly jeopardized by being outnumbered by AAP kids, it's an issue worthy of a solution. If allowing such a move also relieves some of the parental friction at the center, all the better.