Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nah. In Fairfax County, there are a lot of pyramids that are good schools, with lots of families who prioritize education, with townhouses and SFH in the very reasonable range of $300-600k. But people choose other areas for bigger houses and then complain about the schools. The GS score was right there, when you bought your house.

You're forgetting to account for reasonable work commutes. Many of the strong pyramids with reasonably priced townhouses don't have viable commutes.

Also, recommending that upper middle class people move away from poor people just leads to even more gentrification and an even bigger divide between "good" schools and "bad" schools. A county as wealthy as Fairfax should be able to educate kids without this level of segregation.

This. We live in a so so pyramid, couldn’t afford McLean when we bought our house ten years ago, probably still can’t. But that commute, or Burke or Springfield, would mean one of us rapid never see the kids during the week. We prioritized family time. And we would 100% send to private if DC wasn’t in AAP. It would still be more affordable than than buying a house in the neighborhood with the better ES down the way. And we’re saving for private HS.

SMH

Care to elaborate?

Fairfax high schools are good, even the not-so-good ones. Barring some special issue, there's no reason to send a DC to private high school in Fairfax County. Elementary schools are the problem, not high schools.

Anonymous wrote:So I have a kid that was struggling in AAP, and I asked about moving him to GenEd. The school admin. said they usually don’t move the kids because of self-esteem issues and potential teasing about it from other kids. So we stuck with AAP, and this year he is doing fine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

2) Sometimes teachers DON'T recognize the brilliance of quirky kids. They see a kid who does messy work and makes a lot of mistakes. There's a wide range of perceptiveness in teachers and they have their own biases. 3) Putting a teacher in a role to remove kids from AAP puts a lot of pressure on them and makes them subject to hostility from parents. 4) Putting SoLs in a gatekeeping function will pressure AAP teachers to teach to them more which few AAP parents would want.
.

So testing is fine, as long as it's only done once and any mistake admitting a kid into the program is never acknowledged?

+1. Point 2 and 3 are both problems with the initial admissions process in 2nd grade. At least the AAP teacher should have more training with gifted kids than the 2nd grade teacher. Also, at least they would have evidence that the kid is not performing well in AAP rather than speculation about whether a 2nd grader may or may not do well in AAP.

Point 4 already happens at some AAP centers. My kids had an entire month devoted to SOL review, with huge review packets for both math and language arts. In 3rd grade, they completely glossed over Ancient Rome and Greece to add more SOL review time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
My kids scored pass advanced on all of their SOLs. It's not a huge hurdle. At the very least, if both the SOL score and teacher indicate that a child would be better served in gen ed, the child should be removed from AAP.

My kid's best friend in AAP is brilliant in math He can explain math concepts and solve spatial problems at a very high level--he intuitively seems to use calculus etc. He's regularly solves competition style math problems. But ask him to do basic 3-4th grade computation and his work is riddled with errors--he just flubs up a lot. Not this thing. If he uses a calculator he can do higher level math, but he would likely not pass the elementary math SOL. Kids at the higher end can be really quirky and uneven in their performance. They still need advanced educational supports. SO definitely there needs to be multiple measures besides the SoL

Let's un-derail the conversation. In the case of your kid's friend, the teacher would likely recognize the kid's brilliance and advocate to keep him in AAP. This is different from kids who are scoring poorly on SOLs AND the teacher thinks the kid is struggling. Many kids get accepted into AAP who are somewhat above average, and got in mostly because they're privileged and prepped for the tests. If the kid is demonstrating that he can't hack it both via tests and via teacher recommendation, then the kid should be returned to gen ed. There are more AAP kids in this group than you might imagine.

A large part of the problem is that FCPS is lumping together the gifted kids and the somewhat advanced kids into a single program when they have very different needs.

I don't think my example derailed the conversation. 1) It was an example that shows one of the problems of just using SoLs. 2) Sometimes teachers DON'T recognize the brilliance of quirky kids. They see a kid who does messy work and makes a lot of mistakes. There's a wide range of perceptiveness in teachers and they have their own biases. 3) Putting a teacher in a role to remove kids from AAP puts a lot of pressure on them and makes them subject to hostility from parents. 4) Putting SoLs in a gatekeeping function will pressure AAP teachers to teach to them more which few AAP parents would want.

I think it would be more effective to use all those measures as an established signal to a parents that it would be recommended to reconsider AAP, but not a requirement.

My kids aren't particularly "quirky", find school and tests easy, and are both on the higher end of giftedness (WISC>140) so I get the issue you're talking about. My kids are also not at a center where prepping is the norm so I may worry about it less than you.
But I think your proposed solution has too many flaws.

Aren't all AAP teachers required to be certified to teach gifted kids? At our school they are. Why wouldn't AAP teachers be the ones to identify whether AAP is not the right fit?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
My kids scored pass advanced on all of their SOLs. It's not a huge hurdle. At the very least, if both the SOL score and teacher indicate that a child would be better served in gen ed, the child should be removed from AAP.

My kid's best friend in AAP is brilliant in math He can explain math concepts and solve spatial problems at a very high level--he intuitively seems to use calculus etc. He's regularly solves competition style math problems. But ask him to do basic 3-4th grade computation and his work is riddled with errors--he just flubs up a lot. Not this thing. If he uses a calculator he can do higher level math, but he would likely not pass the elementary math SOL. Kids at the higher end can be really quirky and uneven in their performance. They still need advanced educational supports. SO definitely there needs to be multiple measures besides the SoL

Let's un-derail the conversation. In the case of your kid's friend, the teacher would likely recognize the kid's brilliance and advocate to keep him in AAP. This is different from kids who are scoring poorly on SOLs AND the teacher thinks the kid is struggling. Many kids get accepted into AAP who are somewhat above average, and got in mostly because they're privileged and prepped for the tests. If the kid is demonstrating that he can't hack it both via tests and via teacher recommendation, then the kid should be returned to gen ed. There are more AAP kids in this group than you might imagine.

A large part of the problem is that FCPS is lumping together the gifted kids and the somewhat advanced kids into a single program when they have very different needs.

I don't think my example derailed the conversation. 1) It was an example that shows one of the problems of just using SoLs. 2) Sometimes teachers DON'T recognize the brilliance of quirky kids. They see a kid who does messy work and makes a lot of mistakes. There's a wide range of perceptiveness in teachers and they have their own biases. 3) Putting a teacher in a role to remove kids from AAP puts a lot of pressure on them and makes them subject to hostility from parents. 4) Putting SoLs in a gatekeeping function will pressure AAP teachers to teach to them more which few AAP parents would want.

I think it would be more effective to use all those measures as an established signal to a parents that it would be recommended to reconsider AAP, but not a requirement.

My kids aren't particularly "quirky", find school and tests easy, and are both on the higher end of giftedness (WISC>140) so I get the issue you're talking about. My kids are also not at a center where prepping is the norm so I may worry about it less than you.
But I think your proposed solution has too many flaws.

They are just teaching material advanced, not tapping into giftedness. That would be a Gifted and Talented Program then.

Aren't all AAP teachers required to be certified to teach gifted kids? At our school they are. Why wouldn't AAP teachers be the ones to identify whether AAP is not the right fit?

Anonymous wrote:I always thought AAP was bullshit anyway if you are picking kids based on their scores and GBRS when they have barely started learning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nah. In Fairfax County, there are a lot of pyramids that are good schools, with lots of families who prioritize education, with townhouses and SFH in the very reasonable range of $300-600k. But people choose other areas for bigger houses and then complain about the schools. The GS score was right there, when you bought your house.

You're forgetting to account for reasonable work commutes. Many of the strong pyramids with reasonably priced townhouses don't have viable commutes.

Also, recommending that upper middle class people move away from poor people just leads to even more gentrification and an even bigger divide between "good" schools and "bad" schools. A county as wealthy as Fairfax should be able to educate kids without this level of segregation.

This. We live in a so so pyramid, couldn’t afford McLean when we bought our house ten years ago, probably still can’t. But that commute, or Burke or Springfield, would mean one of us rapid never see the kids during the week. We prioritized family time. And we would 100% send to private if DC wasn’t in AAP. It would still be more affordable than than buying a house in the neighborhood with the better ES down the way. And we’re saving for private HS.

SMH

Care to elaborate?

Fairfax high schools are good, even the not-so-good ones. Barring some special issue, there's no reason to send a DC to private high school in Fairfax County. Elementary schools are the problem, not high schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nah. In Fairfax County, there are a lot of pyramids that are good schools, with lots of families who prioritize education, with townhouses and SFH in the very reasonable range of $300-600k. But people choose other areas for bigger houses and then complain about the schools. The GS score was right there, when you bought your house.

You're forgetting to account for reasonable work commutes. Many of the strong pyramids with reasonably priced townhouses don't have viable commutes.

Also, recommending that upper middle class people move away from poor people just leads to even more gentrification and an even bigger divide between "good" schools and "bad" schools. A county as wealthy as Fairfax should be able to educate kids without this level of segregation.

This. We live in a so so pyramid, couldn’t afford McLean when we bought our house ten years ago, probably still can’t. But that commute, or Burke or Springfield, would mean one of us rapid never see the kids during the week. We prioritized family time. And we would 100% send to private if DC wasn’t in AAP. It would still be more affordable than than buying a house in the neighborhood with the better ES down the way. And we’re saving for private HS.

SMH

Care to elaborate?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nah. In Fairfax County, there are a lot of pyramids that are good schools, with lots of families who prioritize education, with townhouses and SFH in the very reasonable range of $300-600k. But people choose other areas for bigger houses and then complain about the schools. The GS score was right there, when you bought your house.

You're forgetting to account for reasonable work commutes. Many of the strong pyramids with reasonably priced townhouses don't have viable commutes.

Also, recommending that upper middle class people move away from poor people just leads to even more gentrification and an even bigger divide between "good" schools and "bad" schools. A county as wealthy as Fairfax should be able to educate kids without this level of segregation.

This. We live in a so so pyramid, couldn’t afford McLean when we bought our house ten years ago, probably still can’t. But that commute, or Burke or Springfield, would mean one of us rapid never see the kids during the week. We prioritized family time. And we would 100% send to private if DC wasn’t in AAP. It would still be more affordable than than buying a house in the neighborhood with the better ES down the way. And we’re saving for private HS.

SMH

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
My kids scored pass advanced on all of their SOLs. It's not a huge hurdle. At the very least, if both the SOL score and teacher indicate that a child would be better served in gen ed, the child should be removed from AAP.

My kid's best friend in AAP is brilliant in math He can explain math concepts and solve spatial problems at a very high level--he intuitively seems to use calculus etc. He's regularly solves competition style math problems. But ask him to do basic 3-4th grade computation and his work is riddled with errors--he just flubs up a lot. Not this thing. If he uses a calculator he can do higher level math, but he would likely not pass the elementary math SOL. Kids at the higher end can be really quirky and uneven in their performance. They still need advanced educational supports. SO definitely there needs to be multiple measures besides the SoL

Let's un-derail the conversation. In the case of your kid's friend, the teacher would likely recognize the kid's brilliance and advocate to keep him in AAP. This is different from kids who are scoring poorly on SOLs AND the teacher thinks the kid is struggling. Many kids get accepted into AAP who are somewhat above average, and got in mostly because they're privileged and prepped for the tests. If the kid is demonstrating that he can't hack it both via tests and via teacher recommendation, then the kid should be returned to gen ed. There are more AAP kids in this group than you might imagine.

A large part of the problem is that FCPS is lumping together the gifted kids and the somewhat advanced kids into a single program when they have very different needs.

I don't think my example derailed the conversation. 1) It was an example that shows one of the problems of just using SoLs. 2) Sometimes teachers DON'T recognize the brilliance of quirky kids. They see a kid who does messy work and makes a lot of mistakes. There's a wide range of perceptiveness in teachers and they have their own biases. 3) Putting a teacher in a role to remove kids from AAP puts a lot of pressure on them and makes them subject to hostility from parents. 4) Putting SoLs in a gatekeeping function will pressure AAP teachers to teach to them more which few AAP parents would want.

I think it would be more effective to use all those measures as an established signal to a parents that it would be recommended to reconsider AAP, but not a requirement.

My kids aren't particularly "quirky", find school and tests easy, and are both on the higher end of giftedness (WISC>140) so I get the issue you're talking about. My kids are also not at a center where prepping is the norm so I may worry about it less than you.
But I think your proposed solution has too many flaws.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nah. In Fairfax County, there are a lot of pyramids that are good schools, with lots of families who prioritize education, with townhouses and SFH in the very reasonable range of $300-600k. But people choose other areas for bigger houses and then complain about the schools. The GS score was right there, when you bought your house.

You're forgetting to account for reasonable work commutes. Many of the strong pyramids with reasonably priced townhouses don't have viable commutes.

Also, recommending that upper middle class people move away from poor people just leads to even more gentrification and an even bigger divide between "good" schools and "bad" schools. A county as wealthy as Fairfax should be able to educate kids without this level of segregation.

This. We live in a so so pyramid, couldn’t afford McLean when we bought our house ten years ago, probably still can’t. But that commute, or Burke or Springfield, would mean one of us rapid never see the kids during the week. We prioritized family time. And we would 100% send to private if DC wasn’t in AAP. It would still be more affordable than than buying a house in the neighborhood with the better ES down the way. And we’re saving for private HS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nah. In Fairfax County, there are a lot of pyramids that are good schools, with lots of families who prioritize education, with townhouses and SFH in the very reasonable range of $300-600k. But people choose other areas for bigger houses and then complain about the schools. The GS score was right there, when you bought your house.

You're forgetting to account for reasonable work commutes. Many of the strong pyramids with reasonably priced townhouses don't have viable commutes.

Also, recommending that upper middle class people move away from poor people just leads to even more gentrification and an even bigger divide between "good" schools and "bad" schools. A county as wealthy as Fairfax should be able to educate kids without this level of segregation.

Money has nothing to do with it. Parents not being able to help their children or provide a supportive educational environment at home is the reason these kids fall behind.

Sure, all of the parents who don't care just happen to be centered in a few pyramids, and those pyramids also just happen to have the highest percentage of FARMs students in the county. I'm sure it's totally a coincidence and has nothing to do with a segregated school system

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nah. In Fairfax County, there are a lot of pyramids that are good schools, with lots of families who prioritize education, with townhouses and SFH in the very reasonable range of $300-600k. But people choose other areas for bigger houses and then complain about the schools. The GS score was right there, when you bought your house.

You're forgetting to account for reasonable work commutes. Many of the strong pyramids with reasonably priced townhouses don't have viable commutes.

Also, recommending that upper middle class people move away from poor people just leads to even more gentrification and an even bigger divide between "good" schools and "bad" schools. A county as wealthy as Fairfax should be able to educate kids without this level of segregation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

2) Sometimes teachers DON'T recognize the brilliance of quirky kids. They see a kid who does messy work and makes a lot of mistakes. There's a wide range of perceptiveness in teachers and they have their own biases. 3) Putting a teacher in a role to remove kids from AAP puts a lot of pressure on them and makes them subject to hostility from parents. 4) Putting SoLs in a gatekeeping function will pressure AAP teachers to teach to them more which few AAP parents would want.
.

So testing is fine, as long as it's only done once and any mistake admitting a kid into the program is never acknowledged?