How to ace the HOPE

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://www.harlan.k12.ky.us/pdf/Gifted&TalentedForms/HopeScaleDirections.pdf
No joke, HOPE is racist! Teachers are being forced to assess students based on their race:

"For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from African-American families to other children from African-American families, (Asian Americans children to other Asian American children, White children to other White children), etc."

This link is from Kentucky? These are not the instructions FCPS teachers were given.

what instructions were FCPS teachers given?

[Anonymous]

HOPE rating scale manual is not freely available online, but this excerpt shows that HOPE is designed to compare children of "similar age, background, experience, culture and/or environment". page 26, second line.

"compare those from low-income families ... specific cultural groups, girls to girls" .... line 6.

It is not hard to imagine FCPS would need to go along because it is baked in the rating manual.

https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting...D=238383&IsArchive=0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:HOPE rating scale manual is not freely available online, but this excerpt shows that HOPE is designed to compare children of "similar age, background, experience, culture and/or environment". page 26, second line.

"compare those from low-income families ... specific cultural groups, girls to girls" .... line 6.

It is not hard to imagine FCPS would need to go along because it is baked in the rating manual.

https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting...D=238383&IsArchive=0

"Culture group" is a legally safer alias for student race group

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HOPE rating scale manual is not freely available online, but this excerpt shows that HOPE is designed to compare children of "similar age, background, experience, culture and/or environment". page 26, second line.

"compare those from low-income families ... specific cultural groups, girls to girls" .... line 6.

It is not hard to imagine FCPS would need to go along because it is baked in the rating manual.

https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting...D=238383&IsArchive=0

"Culture group" is a legally safer alias for student race group

During our AAP info session, the AART said "we are comparing children with similar experiences, we know some kids get tutors, so that's a different experience from the kids who don't get tutors". Now I have to tell my 8 year old kid not to tell his teacher that he goes to AOPS or RSM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HOPE rating scale manual is not freely available online, but this excerpt shows that HOPE is designed to compare children of "similar age, background, experience, culture and/or environment". page 26, second line.

"compare those from low-income families ... specific cultural groups, girls to girls" .... line 6.

It is not hard to imagine FCPS would need to go along because it is baked in the rating manual.

https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting...D=238383&IsArchive=0

"Culture group" is a legally safer alias for student race group

During our AAP info session, the AART said "we are comparing children with similar experiences, we know some kids get tutors, so that's a different experience from the kids who don't get tutors". Now I have to tell my 8 year old kid not to tell his teacher that he goes to AOPS or RSM?

Your AART is an idiot for sharing that and HOPE sounds like a disaster if this is one of the “experts” guiding teachers on how to implement the new rating criteria.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No offense, but the average SAT Scores of Education Major are low comparing with other majors.

https://www.businessinsider.com/heres-the-average-sat-score-for-every-college-major-2014-10

Test is not the only thing to measure people's knowledge and capability. But, most teachers were not academically advanced when they were students. Are there enough training for teachers to learn about gifted student's traits?

I am a middle school teacher who teaches three AAP sections. My own educational profile isI remarkably similar to many of my colleagues' profiles.

1. Very few of us have an undergraduate degree in education. Most of us majored in mathematics, biology, chemistry, English, political science, business, World History, or another sublect-specific area.

2. I do not personally know any teachers who do not have at least one M.A., M.Ed., MBA, or MFA.

3. Everyone who teaches AAP has completed additional coursework in advanced academics.

4. A large percentage of teachers were in AAP/GT courses themselves when they were in school. I don't know where you got your information that most teachers were not academically advanced themselves. Based on my experience, in three different schools, that is far from the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HOPE rating scale manual is not freely available online, but this excerpt shows that HOPE is designed to compare children of "similar age, background, experience, culture and/or environment". page 26, second line.

"compare those from low-income families ... specific cultural groups, girls to girls" .... line 6.

It is not hard to imagine FCPS would need to go along because it is baked in the rating manual.

https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting...D=238383&IsArchive=0

"Culture group" is a legally safer alias for student race group

During our AAP info session, the AART said "we are comparing children with similar experiences, we know some kids get tutors, so that's a different experience from the kids who don't get tutors". Now I have to tell my 8 year old kid not to tell his teacher that he goes to AOPS or RSM?

Or stay back in gen ed, since you love it so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No offense, but the average SAT Scores of Education Major are low comparing with other majors.

https://www.businessinsider.com/heres-the-average-sat-score-for-every-college-major-2014-10

Test is not the only thing to measure people's knowledge and capability. But, most teachers were not academically advanced when they were students. Are there enough training for teachers to learn about gifted student's traits?

I am a middle school teacher who teaches three AAP sections. My own educational profile isI remarkably similar to many of my colleagues' profiles.

1. Very few of us have an undergraduate degree in education. Most of us majored in mathematics, biology, chemistry, English, political science, business, World History, or another sublect-specific area.

2. I do not personally know any teachers who do not have at least one M.A., M.Ed., MBA, or MFA.

3. Everyone who teaches AAP has completed additional coursework in advanced academics.

4. A large percentage of teachers were in AAP/GT courses themselves when they were in school. I don't know where you got your information that most teachers were not academically advanced themselves. Based on my experience, in three different schools, that is far from the truth.

Much obliged, AAP Teacher! We love the AAP program, its teachers, and the awesome peer group. A huge improvement from gen ed.

However, this new HOPE shenanigan where teachers are expected to morph into psychics, put on a racial lens, and assess students within their racial/cultural groups has everyone scratching their heads.

[Anonymous]

This just sounds like they're moving in the direction of "local norms". I really doubt they are breaking it down as much as several PP's describe.

Our teacher at a competitive center school said at the very beginning of the year that a kid only with high scores but didn't do the classroom work would NOT be getting in to AAP- because the assumption is the kid is prepping. So... I made sure mine knew to raise hand/participate, do good/thoughtful work etc. DC got a good HOPE rating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are a teacher that fills these HOPE worksheets, can you provide practical examples on what you noticed that caused you to assign a "Always" or "Almost Always" rating for one or more of these attributes:
(please provide practical examples what the student did in the classroom or said/asked the teacher )
Academic:
======
1) Performs or shows potential for performing at remarkably high levels.
6) Is eager to explore new concepts.
7) Exhibits intellectual intensity.
9) Uses alternative approaches or processes.
10) Thinks "outside the box.”
11) Has intense interests.

Social:
=====
2) Is sensitive to larger or deeper issues of human concern.
3) Is self-aware.
4) Shows compassion for others.
5) Is a leader within their group of peers.
8) Effectively interacts with adults or older students.

https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

Items 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 are Academic. Items 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 are Social. Academic subscore and Social subscore are compiled by student group - based on ethnicity, income group, etc.? Students are not compared as whole but within the subgroup they belong to? Is this how it works?
Is there a link to the entire HOPE administration manual?

How does FCPS obtain parents income data?
And grouping by ethnicity? isn't this legally risky?

It says "compare those from low-income families to .... low-income families". Likely from the reduced/free lunch application.

I think the way is questionable. "For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from specific cultural groups to other children from the same cultural group, girls to girls, etc."

The instruction suggest comparing Asian students against other Asian students, so a Latino "Always" turns into an Asian "often"? The effect would be establishing certain gender or culture group "bias" that disfavors certain groups esp. those Asian groups might have a small sample size?

I am not fan of the crazy TJ lawsuit parent group but this instruction seems to imply such bias is baked into the evaluation.

The core concept behind HOPE appears to be to promote equity and diversity in advanced academic programs (aka giftedness and talented), by applying different yard sticks to different demographic groups. When FCPS compares current representation with their predetermined diversity chart, Asian Americans are glaringly over-represented in AAP, and HOPE gives hope to balance their representation by creating competition within their ethnic group of students?

So they want to penalize Asians?

[Anonymous]

I was talking to one of my neighborhood FCPS teacher who mentioned that there are lazy parents who can't get their kids to do basic homework, no daily reading, etc... no afterschool prep to get them ready for school. Teacher's teen daughter is a tutor at out local Kumon center that DC attends.

Same with older's basketball coach. No Prepp, no play minutes. DC learnt it the hardway. Now they prepp alot, and are on the court more and get a few baskets every single game, while the unprepared players and their parents just sit and watch, and ofcourse cheer for entire team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This just sounds like they're moving in the direction of "local norms". I really doubt they are breaking it down as much as several PP's describe.

Our teacher at a competitive center school said at the very beginning of the year that a kid only with high scores but didn't do the classroom work would NOT be getting in to AAP- because the assumption is the kid is prepping. So... I made sure mine knew to raise hand/participate, do good/thoughtful work etc. DC got a good HOPE rating.

That assumption is idiotic. The kids who are prepping and have very invested parents are going to be the kids who are doing all of the classroom work and are participating fully in class. The kids with the high test scores who aren't doing the classroom work are much more likely to be the naturally gifted kids who either due to a difficult home life, undiagnosed LDs, sheer boredom, or any number of other factors are checked out and not having their needs met in the general education classroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are a teacher that fills these HOPE worksheets, can you provide practical examples on what you noticed that caused you to assign a "Always" or "Almost Always" rating for one or more of these attributes:
(please provide practical examples what the student did in the classroom or said/asked the teacher )
Academic:
======
1) Performs or shows potential for performing at remarkably high levels.
6) Is eager to explore new concepts.
7) Exhibits intellectual intensity.
9) Uses alternative approaches or processes.
10) Thinks "outside the box.”
11) Has intense interests.

Social:
=====
2) Is sensitive to larger or deeper issues of human concern.
3) Is self-aware.
4) Shows compassion for others.
5) Is a leader within their group of peers.
8) Effectively interacts with adults or older students.

https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

Items 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 are Academic. Items 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 are Social. Academic subscore and Social subscore are compiled by student group - based on ethnicity, income group, etc.? Students are not compared as whole but within the subgroup they belong to? Is this how it works?
Is there a link to the entire HOPE administration manual?

How does FCPS obtain parents income data?
And grouping by ethnicity? isn't this legally risky?

It says "compare those from low-income families to .... low-income families". Likely from the reduced/free lunch application.

I think the way is questionable. "For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from specific cultural groups to other children from the same cultural group, girls to girls, etc."

The instruction suggest comparing Asian students against other Asian students, so a Latino "Always" turns into an Asian "often"? The effect would be establishing certain gender or culture group "bias" that disfavors certain groups esp. those Asian groups might have a small sample size?

I am not fan of the crazy TJ lawsuit parent group but this instruction seems to imply such bias is baked into the evaluation.

The core concept behind HOPE appears to be to promote equity and diversity in advanced academic programs (aka giftedness and talented), by applying different yard sticks to different demographic groups. When FCPS compares current representation with their predetermined diversity chart, Asian Americans are glaringly over-represented in AAP, and HOPE gives hope to balance their representation by creating competition within their ethnic group of students?

So they want to penalize Asians?

Not just Asian Americans, every culture/ethnicity/race kids are compared to within their group. This is where HOPE underlying concept differs from GBRS approach where student culture/ethnicity/race was never factored in and students were never compared to each other and were assessed independently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was talking to one of my neighborhood FCPS teacher who mentioned that there are lazy parents who can't get their kids to do basic homework, no daily reading, etc... no afterschool prep to get them ready for school. Teacher's teen daughter is a tutor at out local Kumon center that DC attends.

Same with older's basketball coach. No Prepp, no play minutes. DC learnt it the hardway. Now they prepp alot, and are on the court more and get a few baskets every single game, while the unprepared players and their parents just sit and watch, and ofcourse cheer for entire team.

Couldn't have said this better. Lazy and irresponsible parents foolishly assume they can outsource their parenting responsibility to public school teacher and team coach, and invest no time into prepping their child at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was talking to one of my neighborhood FCPS teacher who mentioned that there are lazy parents who can't get their kids to do basic homework, no daily reading, etc... no afterschool prep to get them ready for school. Teacher's teen daughter is a tutor at out local Kumon center that DC attends.

Same with older's basketball coach. No Prepp, no play minutes. DC learnt it the hardway. Now they prepp alot, and are on the court more and get a few baskets every single game, while the unprepared players and their parents just sit and watch, and ofcourse cheer for entire team.

Couldn't have said this better. Lazy and irresponsible parents foolishly assume they can outsource their parenting responsibility to public school teacher and team coach, and invest no time into prepping their child at home.

How does this relate to this topic and AAP? Also, reading to your kid and doing HW isn’t typically the prepping ppl refer to on here. That’s basic parenting. Taking paid courses and doing workbook drills on tests like cogat and NNAT, is prepping.