Anonymous wrote:Do most schools have advanced math starting in 3rd? A lot seem to wait until 5th or even 6th. In some schools, advanced math isn’t even it’s own class, but rather it’s a 10 kid grouping within a regular math class. When this is done, the kids aren’t receiving a true advanced math class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why does closing the achievement gap mean RAISING the achievement gap for one group and lowering it for another? Isn't that taking it even further apart?? LOWER it for the URM. But don't RAISE it for Asian Americans!

You're not actually raising the threshold for the Asian or White child. You're creating a bell curve for White population and Asian population, and certain White or Asian children may be 'screened out' based on a peer comparison because they are on the very high end +2SD or into +3SD (as a WISC score of 150+ suggests) or didn't receive as good of an overall rating as compared to the other White or Asians against which they were compared. For the +3SD, the parents should really be looking elsewhere as some posters have noted here. FCPS is not the right setting to serve these children and hopefully the parents have some understanding of this. The reason for the screening out the high end of the curve is to serve the White, Asian, Hispanic and AA population that are relatively comparable. Though even in this scenario, the population of White and Asian accepted into the program score much higher than Hispanic and Asian.

All of this is also largely predicated on demographics of the school, both for feeder and center schools. If you're in Colvin Run or Churchill territory, you're looking at Hispanic/AA population at approx 5% and 10%, respectively, for the center schools and the feeder schools. Think about that! We are talking combined ethnicities. You have a very small pool of Hispanic or African Americans who will be considered for AAP. Compare that to Mosby Woods and the feeder schools for MW, where the range of Hispanic/AA go from 20% to 35% (sometimes equivalent to the number of Asians). Is it possible that FCPS screened out more Asian or White kids in Mosby Woods center based LIV program compared to that of Colvin Run or Churchill? It's most likely what occurred. As an Asian or White in the MW center/feeder schools, your competition is also a lot stiffer. You're competing for a seat that is being challenged by not only more Hispanic/AA representation (since FCPS won't be able to meet their quotas in schools like Colvin Run or Churchill or other few), but also a stiffer White and Asian population. Your Asian kid might have gotten a 140 CoGAT and 2F. The other Asian child received a 136 on CoGAT but a 4Cs. My bet is that the latter Asian child getting through but the former getting rejected. You may follow up with the WISC, but if most of the spots are already gone at the center, it makes it hard for the appeals process to work in your favor. Even with a high WISC score. I think that's why when FCPS says they look at AAP admissions "holistically," we really should think much bigger picture than an individual's packet. Their holistic approach is noting some much larger.

Anonymous wrote:
Why does closing the achievement gap mean RAISING the achievement gap for one group and lowering it for another? Isn't that taking it even further apart?? LOWER it for the URM. But don't RAISE it for Asian Americans!

Anonymous wrote:
How was it possible for Asians (many of whom are relatively recent immigrants with no social status or connections and English being a foreign language to them) to overcome the "achievement gap" with similar obstacles and discrimination faced by Hispanics and blacks in America? Don't say only elites cam to US because clearly that is not the case- most Asian immigrants came to US for economic reasons.

Didn't they overcome the gap by working hard and studying hard or maybe even harder? Do you want to try going to S. Korea and try to become one of the top students there when you do not speak Korean? How much extra effort and studying would that take? So mow we want to discourage hard working and hard studying?

US is the laughing stock of the world now because we moved away from merit based system too much in the last several decades among other reasons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh. You're missing the point. FCPS kids who do not attend TJ will still receive a fabulous education. FCPS kids who are above grade level are unlikely to receive much of an education in elementary gen ed. That's why white and Asian parents are so desperate to get their kids into AAP, but also why white parents don't care so much about getting their kids into TJ.

Providing advanced math starting in 3rd in every school and stronger differentiated instruction in language arts to the advanced kids would alleviate a lot of the desperation people have to get their advanced kids into AAP.

I think a poster noted that most advanced White or Asian child is getting advanced education through enrichment classes. There is more bragging rights for White and Asian parents that their kids are in LIV AAP, but that's about it. Let's not make LIV AAP something it is not. Outside of Advanced Math, LIV curriculum is laughable.

Anonymous wrote:TJ and AAP aren't analogous here. Kids who have the aptitude to handle TJ but aren't accepted into TJ will still have a full load of AP/IB classes available at their base schools and will still have excellent college prospects.

Kids who have the aptitude for AAP but aren't accepted will not be given a good education in gen ed at most FCPS schools. They will be bored, unchallenged, and largely ignored by the teacher throughout elementary school.

Anonymous wrote:
We are all being speculative here and assuming the Hispanic or African American child who gained entry to AAP LIV is the one who is behind in reading level or can't advance quickly enough in math. I'm sure there are plenty of White and Asian kids who have the same issue. Will the White or Asian child who scores 150+ on the WISC have the same issue? Who knows! The child could still be bored out of their mind and completely disengaged. That child would really not benefit in FCPS's LIV AAP program, but that's not being discussed here at all. In certain countries, gifted/talented programs are stratified. Grades are sectioned with the most advanced kids in a particular section, the next tier of kids in a separate section and so on. Elementary schools have 4 sections generally per grade, from A (highest achievers/most gifted) to D (GenEd). And larger schools may have two of the same section to accommodate the student in the right section. There are many ways to really address the issue. I think FCPS picked one, which for the folks who are left out seems quite unfair. For the parents whose kids scored 150+, you really should investigate other modes of learning for your children. FCPS's AAP program is certainly not meant for your children. I would go further and say that you are stifling your child's potential by keeping them in AAP and thinking that will meet their needs.

Anonymous wrote:Ugh. You're missing the point. FCPS kids who do not attend TJ will still receive a fabulous education. FCPS kids who are above grade level are unlikely to receive much of an education in elementary gen ed. That's why white and Asian parents are so desperate to get their kids into AAP, but also why white parents don't care so much about getting their kids into TJ.

Providing advanced math starting in 3rd in every school and stronger differentiated instruction in language arts to the advanced kids would alleviate a lot of the desperation people have to get their advanced kids into AAP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes in practice giving the underdog kid extra help throughout their education life will yield a measure of success in closing the achievement gap. I think what people are really having trouble with here is the concept of what "closing the achievement gap" means and how "equity" is used to do that. Unfortunately, what you should be lobbying for as a parent of White/Asian origin whose kids are being left out is what a previous poster noted--incorporate a robust GenEd program so that you don't feel like your kids are "losing out" on an education. Whether you just arrived to this country from S. Korea or India isn't the issue. Chances are, your smart kid will get into a good college and earn a rewarding degree to become successful irrespective of AAP placement in elementary school. However, there's less empirical data that the same occurs for the H/AA kid that shows potential. Chances are, without giving them a leg up in the process, that kid's trajectory is not the same. It's not great to hear, I get that, but it is what is being discussed in all circles dealing with this issue.

There's a difference between giving an underdog kid extra help so they can merit the advanced classes vs. artificially boosting them into classes for which they are unqualified, watering down the class, and then inflating their grades so they look like they belong there. FCPS already has some programs that actually boost minority students and help them thrive in advanced courses. In theory, Young Scholars is supposed to function to give underdogs a leg up. Likewise, the middle school AVID program is designed to give disadvantaged students the help they need to meet the requirements of an honors class, which is great. FCPS has also been known to pressure minorities into taking AAP classes for which they are grossly unqualified and ultimately get like a 1 on the AP Exam. But since they're only rated on minority participation and not minority success, they're perfectly happy to use minority kids as props without actually helping them achieve.

As far as AAP goes, 3rd and 4th grade are very foundational. Pushing kids into faster paced math classes than they can handle is not beneficial to anyone. If the class moves too fast for the kid to fully and completely understand the content, then those comprehension gaps will ultimately cause problems. Likewise, kids who are not reading above grade level will be unable to fully engage with the AAP language arts curriculum. Additionally, in both cases, the teacher will have to water down the entire class for the kid who is behind. There is a limit to just how much differentiation the teacher can do within one classroom, and the bottom kids will generally require the lion's share of the teacher's attention.