Anonymous
08/23/2020 23:57
Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Really? Calling children “duds”? [/quote]
Quoting my kid who has been shackled to too many low performers for too many group projects. My kid has had anxiety over whether she was allowed to fix her partners’ poor grammar, misspellings, and poor content on their slides. Some partners will just screw around and try to distract everyone rather than doing their work. Trust me, the kids know who the bottom performers are in each class. [/quote]
As someone involved with MWES, I can tell you that you couldn't be more off base. Neither you nor your kid know what you are talking about. I have a hunch that you are making some big assumptions based on the race of kids in our school. Shameful.
Trust me, teachers know who the obnoxious parents are. Dud.
Quoting my kid who has been shackled to too many low performers for too many group projects. My kid has had anxiety over whether she was allowed to fix her partners’ poor grammar, misspellings, and poor content on their slides. Some partners will just screw around and try to distract everyone rather than doing their work. Trust me, the kids know who the bottom performers are in each class. [/quote]
As someone involved with MWES, I can tell you that you couldn't be more off base. Neither you nor your kid know what you are talking about. I have a hunch that you are making some big assumptions based on the race of kids in our school. Shameful.
Trust me, teachers know who the obnoxious parents are. Dud.
Anonymous
08/17/2020 06:25
Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It seems like there is a lawsuit here. Just look at page 40 of this report on AAP to FCPS:
https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BPLQKV69B096/$file/FCPS%20final%20report%2005.05.20.pdf
“The review team is aware, around the country, of central administrators’ general hostility toward the concept of advanced education, but even we were surprised at the depth of that feeling among some FCPS central administrators and some principals. Even the idea that advanced students may have academic needs that cannot be met in the regular classroom was met with scorn by many FCPS personnel working in the central administration. When asked for support for their strong beliefs, they vaguely referred to “research” that gifted education does not work, or that teachers can effectively differentiate for the entire range of performance and ability levels they may find in their classrooms or that the implementation of strategies to increase growth mindset would be sufficient to address the educational needs of gifted students. Several administrators shared that they would do away with all AAP services if not for “the political blowback,” as one person phrased it (they were not aware that having advanced programming is required in Virginia, providing additional evidence that knowledge about advanced learning is in need of improvement among this group of FCPS educators).”
Yikes.
And take a glance at the data on pages 36-38. Double yikes.
Differentiation and grouping of identified GT kids in a regular classroom can meet the VA requirement for advanced programming. Just FYI. If the powers that be really want to get rid of the current AAP setup, they can.
It may meet the LEGAL requirement but you and I and everyone else know that it’s BS. When a third of your class can’t read fluently, but you’re reading literary novels, no amount of differentiation one teacher can offer you makes school anything but an exercise in patience. When your classmates are still learning to county money in 2nd grade, but you’re doing division in your head? Same. It’s shameful that people in this county think holding talented kids back is the solution to anything.
Anonymous
08/16/2020 23:41
Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
If a horse has four legs and a tail, and you call the tail a leg, how many legs does it have? Four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg.
Calling ad-hoc in class differentiation a program that meets the state requirements does not make it so, either.
Calling ad-hoc in class differentiation a program that meets the state requirements does not make it so, either.
Anonymous
08/16/2020 23:24
Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:It seems like there is a lawsuit here. Just look at page 40 of this report on AAP to FCPS:
https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BPLQKV69B096/$file/FCPS%20final%20report%2005.05.20.pdf
“The review team is aware, around the country, of central administrators’ general hostility toward the concept of advanced education, but even we were surprised at the depth of that feeling among some FCPS central administrators and some principals. Even the idea that advanced students may have academic needs that cannot be met in the regular classroom was met with scorn by many FCPS personnel working in the central administration. When asked for support for their strong beliefs, they vaguely referred to “research” that gifted education does not work, or that teachers can effectively differentiate for the entire range of performance and ability levels they may find in their classrooms or that the implementation of strategies to increase growth mindset would be sufficient to address the educational needs of gifted students. Several administrators shared that they would do away with all AAP services if not for “the political blowback,” as one person phrased it (they were not aware that having advanced programming is required in Virginia, providing additional evidence that knowledge about advanced learning is in need of improvement among this group of FCPS educators).”
Yikes.
And take a glance at the data on pages 36-38. Double yikes.
Differentiation and grouping of identified GT kids in a regular classroom can meet the VA requirement for advanced programming. Just FYI. If the powers that be really want to get rid of the current AAP setup, they can.