By Asra Q. Nomani
All children are gifted and talented in their own way. Much like soccer, lacrosse and baseball leagues assign their most skilled players to travel teams, "light year kids" are children who are "light years" ahead of their peers in academics.
In Fairfax County, many of those kids are enrolled in a system currently called Advanced Academic Programs, know as AAP, starting in third grade. Previously, it was called "Gifted and Talented."
This fall, the Fairfax County Public School system unveiled a proposal, marketed as an "expansion" plan for its Advanced Academic Programs centers in fall 2013. Many parents are standing up in protest to the plan as actually a dismantling, or, as one parent put it, a "dumbing down," of the county's Advanced Academic Programs.
Just as we have decided as a country that we would leave "no child behind," it's critical we leave no "light year kid" behind.
This blog has been started to give voice to those who seek to make sure we leave no "light year kid" behind, as we work toward improving the education of all children.
To be sure, there are important issues that need to be resolved regarding the current Advanced Academic Programs system in Fairfax County, including, overcrowding at certain AAP centers, increasing the participation of the county's increasingly growing number of African American and Hispanic students, and improving the quality of education that all children receive.
Yet, one thing is clear: the new "expansion" plan is not ready for primetime.
Fairfax County Public Schools doesn't have a clear plan in place, related to critical elements of establishing new, high-level Advanced Academic Programs centers, including issues of facilities and teacher instruction.
Many parents stand opposed to the proposed plan. One of the finest school systems in the country, Fairfax County is a model for the rest of the country. These parents seek to have Fairfax County's nine Board of Education members vote to table the proposed plan so the Fairfax County Public Schools staff can have a serious, thoughtful conversation with the county's parents, educators, and community members, focused on one important issue: how to best support our county's--and our country's--"light year kids."
They are sending the Board of Education a clear message that their children are taught in school in Fairfax County: "Stop and Think."
Tabling the motion would be a victory for our "light year kids," our community and our country. We need to leave no "light year kid" behind.
It is rare to find a child who is "light years" ahead of the others in a class--though it certainly does happen. If a child is "light years" ahead of the others, then he/she does need additional services. The problem in Fairfax County Public Schools is that there are far too many students in AAP classes who are NOT light years ahead of the mainstream. Most of them should be in mainstream classes and learning to function in a world of diversity. Back in the day, teachers managed to teach all the children in a class--no matter what their level. Never will there be a class where all the students are exactly on the same level. Even in AAP, there are students who are way behind the others or way ahead. FCPS needs to go back to the time when only the truly gifted went to the centers. This program has become uncontrollable. Some principals readily put students into these programs when a parent insists upon it. There are some schools in affluent neighborhoods where more students are in the AAP classes than in the mainstream classes. This is ridiculous.
When would you say that the truly gifted, as you described them, were at the centers? How many years ago? And then what did you notice happen? What did the system become uncontrollable. When did principals start readily putting students in programs upon parental insistence? I hope you don't mind all of these questions, but I think a lot of us would benefit from your candid, historical knowledge. Thank you so much for writing! Warmly, Asra
Just to back up a minute, I know of what you speak, and I'll just say that, for me, I just hesitate because I know how hard it is to parent, to work, to inspire our kids, to inspire ourselves. I want to do more reporting about the dynamic of which you speak so that we can understand why it's happening. I'd love to talk with you more about it, so would you send me an email at asra(a)asranomani.com, if you wouldn't mind talking more? A teacher below, Kathy Keith, speaks too about this sort of hyper-competition. And I am always looking in the mirror too as i think about these issues. Big picture, it seems, some things, many years in the making, are intersecting to create the political crisis we are witnessing in the future of AAP centers in Fairfax County. Perhaps just as you would, I would like to see us fix the situation rather than dismantle this much-needed service for children. Warmly, Asra
I am far from an expert in this. A lot of my current information is anecdotal. About 20 years ago, FCPS changed the way it selected students for the GT program. Prior to this, the students were selected based only on the Otis-Lennon and the CogAt results. As I understand it, there was no teacher input. I think that only about 1% or 2 % were selected-although I may be mistaken on that. Then, around 20 years ago, FCPS added the Gifted Behavior scale to the mix-which added teacher input. In my mind, this is not objective-although it certainly is worthy. When the scale was added, the number of students selected went up dramatically. At my school, it quadrupled. The number selected continued to rise every year. Parents also began having their children tested privately if their child was not selected. This increased the number of students. The program went from a highly selective GT program to what is something quite different. I understand from staff members, that if a parent is persistent, some principals will allow the child into the program-even if the test scores do not support it. (I do not know if this is absolutely true.) I also know that some parents send their kids to prep courses for the IQ tests. One staff member told me that one of the kids said they had done the same test in the prep class. An IQ test is not an achievement test. It should not require practice. In fact, practice demeans the test. I think it invalidates the test.
I think a "light years kid" would be a child who is intellectually curious and works independently. It is a child who does not require lots of practice and drill to understand or learn concepts. It is a child who grasps things the first time without assistance. I do not believe that the AAP centers are full of "light year kids". I think very bright kids belong with their friends in their local schools. The GT(AAP) should be for those who truly cannot and do not function in their home school.
Please explain what you mean by "... increasing the participation of the county's increasingly growing number of African American and Hispanic students..." Do you mean incorporating more of them into the AAP program? I'm not sure to what you are referring. Is the population of African Americans and Hispanic students growing and they don't participate in something -- sports, education? I"m a little confused. Also, I too don't like the "light year kids" term. Fostering the desire to learn is something you move children towards at a very early age. Just like some children love sports, some children really do love to learn. Speaking of sports, in my experience Fairfax County can be an expensive place to raise an all-star athlete. You will need good resources to get your child on a consistent sports team (soccer, basketball, gymnastics, skating, hockey, baseball, swimming). These teams have the better coaches, neighborhood facilities, or parents who will and can pay. Encouraging education doesn't require good connections and often, it's inexpensive. You may not always be cheering from the sidelines, but seeing your child develop a higher appreciation for astronomy, math, or science can be cool too. If a parent chooses to pay more for testing, they can, but it isn't always necessary to produce an all-star. An all- star can be an all-star writer, reader, musician, artist, thinker... Should the county do away with AAP altogether?
The notion of "underrepresented" is language used to distinguish these minority groups from Asians, a minority group, that is not "underrepresented." I hope that clarifies? And you're not alone in not liking the "light year kids" concept! But, as I mentioned, as a writer, I use that concept as a means of trying to capture quickly a debate, indeed, that is not simple, easy, or as we can see in just the comments here, without controversy.
I agree encouraging education doesn't require money, but I think we have to be honest that, in reality, it does include that dimension, especially in a county as wealthy as Fairfax County. To me that's part of our larger public debate.
That's why I believe, no matter what we call them, they shouldn't be "left behind." Big picture, countywide, do you think that we all need more of a basic education on what "gifted" learning is about? I know I've need a real education myself! Thank you for writing! Gratefully, Asra
As a society, we easily make the kind of distinctions that you are talking about in athletics. For example, my son plays McLean Mustangs football. At the 75-pound level, when the boys are in about fourth grade, they go to summer practice, and they are divided into three levels, "based on their abilities," to borrow your language: American, Central and then National. They don't get their status tattooed on their foreheads, to borrow from your analogy again, but they do wear it on their sleeves, figuratively speaking. I think we would agree it would be a disservice to put a "National" kid on an "American" team where he would face hits and a pace of play that wouldn't match his abilities. In the same way, I think you might agree that it wouldn't be fair to put an "American" kid on a "National" team. He may be the star, but he wouldn't be as challenged as he could be.
In athletics, as with academics, "abilities" is part nature, part nurture, I think we can all agree. Indeed, I believe, as perhaps you do, as well, that we should all be able to succeed to the best of our "abilities." It is a painful, painful topic of conversation, I very much understand, and I apologize for pushing a button for you, but I appreciate you sharing your thoughts, and I hope I have been able to explain my own thinking to you with some level of clarity. Warmly, Asra
Many AAP parents do think their children are “light year” children. Most are probably not that far ahead of the top student left behind. The program just does not take into consideration that some children grow and mature after second grade and are being identified way too early as high achievers-or high achievers. When such a high percentage of FCPS students are in the AAP program, it cannot possibly be what it was initially intended to be. The integrity of the program has been damaged by the prep courses, private testing, and parent pressure. I also think that a lot of AAP parents do not realize that there is a huge jump between second and third grade for all students—even those in regular classes. They feel that their child was not getting challenged in second grade, and then they go to the AAP program and have so much more work. This happens for all third graders It is time to reevaluate this program.
I've met a few of these so-called 'Gifted and Talented'. Yeah, not so much... Now that I understand it's not pure academics and scores, but also parental influence that grants acceptance, it makes far more sense how they got in. Return the program to pure merit-based, and yes, give the truly brightest students the academic challenges they need without the hangers-on dragging down the curve. But don't label them 'light year' or 'indigo' kids - they already have enough social issues to deal with, as academically advanced students. No kids of my own, light year or otherwise.
The school system we have is kind of the lowest common denominator. It doesn't do a perfect job with any of the kids, but represents a compromise between trying to achieve equality while serving everyone's individual needs and providing special help to those who need it, all while providing safety and supervision for 8 hours a day, 186 days/year...within a limited budget. Of course, if you feel like your kid is not well-served by this imperfect system, you are free to make alternate arrangements. You just have to figure out how to pay for it yourself.
I taught for a number of years. I did not teach the same way any two years in a row. Why? Because each year was different and every child was different. Never did I teach less than 27 kids in a class. I taught gifted kids, special needs kids, ESOL kids, disturbed kids, shy kids, aggressive kids, Title I kids, and so-called "normal" kids. All were in the same class. Was it easy? NO. Did I make mistakes? YES. Did the children learn and make progress? YES. Could I have done better? YES. Would the children have been well served to have been grouped with like children? For the most part-NO. Except for the emotionally disturbed --there were one or two children I taught throughout the years that would have been better off elsewhere--and the other kids in the class would have also have been better served had the ED kids not been there. I also taught an autistic child who would suddenly start screaming and wailing for no apparent reason. This particular child did not belong in a mainstream classroom. He was too disruptive and upset the other kids. In my opinion, a good teacher can teach a heterogeneous group and ALL benefit. It takes creativity and planning. However, teaching in a school system where every teacher is expected to teach the same thing at the same time takes away creativity and innovation. I do not see how it can be successful.
http://www.guccibeltstb.com/ Gucci Belt http://www.coachoutletonlineyds.net/ Coach Outlet Store Online http://www.cocoachoutletonline.org/ Coach Outlet Online http://www.coachoutletonlinetsy.net/ Coach Online Outlet