I wonder if the percentages of kids leaving their base school for AAP is different for schools with language immersion programs and those without language immersion programs. Do parents whose kids are involved in language immersion leave their kids at the base school with Level III pull outs more frequently then parents whose kids are not in language immersion?

Anonymous wrote:Your entire class was parent referrals????

Yeah, say what? Really? The whole class?

“FCPS is deathly afraid that, if it makes AAP a true GT program again, there will be massive flight of higher-income families out of some high ESOL/FARMS school pyramids where parents will only keep their kids enrolled if the kids are in AAP.”

There would. I think even the “normal” schools would see more pressure since they could not get away with doing the low level that the standard curriculum seems to call for.

Your entire class was parent referrals????

Anonymous wrote:
I teach AAP and I have many students with scores around 105-120 and GBRS as low as 10 and 11. All of my students last year were parent referrals. There is definitely a push for lower econimic students to be in the program, demonstrating that the program is available to all. Don't get me wrong, it is still a great program - it's just filled with a wide variety of students: gifted, 2e, high acheivers, and those identified in the county as deserving of the opportunity.

Do you feel like those 105-120 kids "needed AAP?" Do you feel that you could adequately differentiate for those kids alongside the truly gifted kids, or was the pace so slow that the gifted kids ended up being under-served?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like AAP has become educational crack in FCPS. The percentage is too high and fosters the perception of a two-track system, but FCPS is deathly afraid that, if it makes AAP a true GT program again, there will be massive flight of higher-income families out of some high ESOL/FARMS school pyramids where parents will only keep their kids enrolled if the kids are in AAP.

I teach AAP and I have many students with scores around 105-120 and GBRS as low as 10 and 11. All of my students last year were parent referrals. There is definitely a push for lower econimic students to be in the program, demonstrating that the program is available to all. Don't get me wrong, it is still a great program - it's just filled with a wide variety of students: gifted, 2e, high acheivers, and those identified in the county as deserving of the opportunity.

I was surprised when the teacher told me that DS is in the top math group. He scored 135 on both tests and is good at math. But reading the many posts on this forum about kids with 140+ scores on the NNAT, Cogat, and WISC, I didn't know he'd be at the top of the class.

The AART at my school tells everyone to parent refer if they have even a single cogat sub score in the 120s. I doubt she would recommend that if most of the kids were being rejected.

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like AAP has become educational crack in FCPS. The percentage is too high and fosters the perception of a two-track system, but FCPS is deathly afraid that, if it makes AAP a true GT program again, there will be massive flight of higher-income families out of some high ESOL/FARMS school pyramids where parents will only keep their kids enrolled if the kids are in AAP.

I teach AAP and I have many students with scores around 105-120 and GBRS as low as 10 and 11. All of my students last year were parent referrals. There is definitely a push for lower econimic students to be in the program, demonstrating that the program is available to all. Don't get me wrong, it is still a great program - it's just filled with a wide variety of students: gifted, 2e, high acheivers, and those identified in the county as deserving of the opportunity.

^ I get this impression as well. I'm not saying the current system is wrong, but I think you've hit the nail on the head wrt fear of changing it to be more selective/restricted than the current program.

The current program doesn't cater exclusively to the top 2%, but provides a better program, and usually families find way for enhanced enrichment activities if their kids are really in the top <1% that even AAP is too limiting for them. Feels about right balance to me, but ultimately there's no line you can draw that is going to perfectly meet every child's needs, we have to do the best we can within reason.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like AAP has become educational crack in FCPS. The percentage is too high and fosters the perception of a two-track system, but FCPS is deathly afraid that, if it makes AAP a true GT program again, there will be massive flight of higher-income families out of some high ESOL/FARMS school pyramids where parents will only keep their kids enrolled if the kids are in AAP.

Anonymous wrote:FCPS does not have a "gifted" program. It is advanced academics so it is not focused on the top 2-3/4/5%. For this reason, the Level IV students are far more than there were under the old gifted program. Therefore 20% is not bizarre. Given the background and families of the kids around here, it is not surprising that 20% will qualify for an advanced academics program.

It's not very advanced for an advanced academics program. It only seems slightly more accelerated than gen ed. I don't think anyone would care how many kids were served by the program if it were still rigorous and not watered down.

Our center is filled with parents that self refer. If families don't realize this, their kiddos are at a huge disadvantage.

^ Thats a common misunderstanding. You don’t need a 132 to get in. It just leads to automatic screening for AAP. Any kid with below 132 test scores can be parent referred. Many of these kids are admitted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS G/T served gifted kids quite well. There’s no reason that they needed to expand the program from 5% to 20%. Many smaller metro regions have dedicated gifted programming that requires a 99th percentile score. FCPS certainly could do the same.

FCPS could decide that, but they didn't. It's been like this for a while, why would you stay rather than moving to a school district that requires a 99 percentile score. FCPS has decided to use tax dollars to meet the needs of advanced kids so more kids benefit. If you don't agree with those decisions, find a system that better meets your expectations.

I thought 132 was at the 99% national level. Both my kids were above 132 and are almost out of AAP so I don't care that much what they do, but I had thought FCPS was trying to be more selective than other counties, not less.

FCPS does not have a "gifted" program. It is advanced academics so it is not focused on the top 2-3/4/5%. For this reason, the Level IV students are far more than there were under the old gifted program. Therefore 20% is not bizarre. Given the background and families of the kids around here, it is not surprising that 20% will qualify for an advanced academics program.