Huge NNAT scoring variability

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Child was administered the test in kindergarten last year and scored in 98th percentile.

Same child was recently administered the test again this year and scored in 52nd percentile.

Just trying to process and understand this. Tests were administered by school (Alexandria City Public).

We haven't done any independent testing, but have considered it. Child reads about two grades above reading level, shows pretty advanced artistic capabilities, and is generally very intellectually curious.

Thoughts or suggestions? Trying to reconcile the huge discrepancy in scores on the same test.

This does seem like such a huge discrepancy that I'm betting they accidentally skipped questions. Or misunderstood how the test worked this time. How did they take the test in Kindergarten? Was it an officially administered test or one they did at home? If it was officially administered, then you have that score from Kindergarten to show the huge discrepancy that something might have gone wrong. They may not agree to retest if he was the only one with a big discrepancy but at least you'll have the official scores from both years to marry with the CogAt results when those come in. If it was not administered officially in Kindergarten, you may have to wait until the CogAt, see what happens there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a short test (<50 questions) and the swing from median (50th percentile) to 2 standard deviations (98th percentile) is only 5 questions (last years numbers, raw number of questions could vary somewhat based on population of participants) so scores can fluctuate wildly based on a few more or a few less missed questions. Could be anything, poor instructions, skipped questions, a butterfly flying around.

This is exactly why using these tests to track kids for 6 years (3rd-8th grade) in FCPS is ridiculous.

They aren't. FCPS uses them as one piece of a referral packet. The teacher observations weigh heavily as do the work samples. I'm an administrator in FCPS, and we spend a lot of time discussing which kids demonstrate that they would be successful in a Level IV classroom. It is not just about the number. I know plenty of kids who came up with the "right" score but didn't have the classroom performance to match it. And conversely, I've seen plenty of kids who did not have the cut score, but demonstrated curiosity, strong work habits and/or creativity that supported a move to a Level IV classroom.

How many proactive teacher referrals of these low score high performing kids have you done? If the scores don't matter, you should get rid of them and save taxpayers a lot of money. The vast majority of AAP admittance is based on test scores, no matter how much thinking administrator do about other factors.

Perhaps you need some reading comprehension lessons. The first poster claimed that the scores were the sole basis for tracking students. The second poster responded by saying that they are one piece and not the sole determinant. They do matter, and I don't think the administrator was claiming they didn't.

Perhaps you need some reading comprehension lessons. Where did the first poster use "sole" basis. The first poster merely said they were used. They are used to track kids, and they are a significant part of the processes. If they are that unreliable, they should not be any part of the tracking process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a short test (<50 questions) and the swing from median (50th percentile) to 2 standard deviations (98th percentile) is only 5 questions (last years numbers, raw number of questions could vary somewhat based on population of participants) so scores can fluctuate wildly based on a few more or a few less missed questions. Could be anything, poor instructions, skipped questions, a butterfly flying around.

This is exactly why using these tests to track kids for 6 years (3rd-8th grade) in FCPS is ridiculous.

They aren't. FCPS uses them as one piece of a referral packet. The teacher observations weigh heavily as do the work samples. I'm an administrator in FCPS, and we spend a lot of time discussing which kids demonstrate that they would be successful in a Level IV classroom. It is not just about the number. I know plenty of kids who came up with the "right" score but didn't have the classroom performance to match it. And conversely, I've seen plenty of kids who did not have the cut score, but demonstrated curiosity, strong work habits and/or creativity that supported a move to a Level IV classroom.

How many proactive teacher referrals of these low score high performing kids have you done? If the scores don't matter, you should get rid of them and save taxpayers a lot of money. The vast majority of AAP admittance is based on test scores, no matter how much thinking administrator do about other factors.

Perhaps you need some reading comprehension lessons. The first poster claimed that the scores were the sole basis for tracking students. The second poster responded by saying that they are one piece and not the sole determinant. They do matter, and I don't think the administrator was claiming they didn't.

Perhaps you need some reading comprehension lessons. Where did the first poster use "sole" basis. The first poster merely said they were used. They are used to track kids, and they are a significant part of the processes. If they are that unreliable, they should not be any part of the tracking process.

The repetition of inaccurate posts on this forum gets old after a while.

Want the facts? Read the FCPS website.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/faqs.shtml

How important are the test scores in determining eligibility for full-time AAP (level IV) center placement?
Test scores are just one piece of data considered when a file is reviewed for full-time AAP (level IV) center placement. The Level IV Center Central Selection Committee, made up of FCPS teachers, specialists, and administrators, considers multiple criteria, including: the Gifted Behaviors Rating Scale (GBRS), ability and achievement test scores, work samples, student progress reports, and other optional information such as the Parent/Guardian Questionnaire (available at http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/forms.shtml).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a short test (<50 questions) and the swing from median (50th percentile) to 2 standard deviations (98th percentile) is only 5 questions (last years numbers, raw number of questions could vary somewhat based on population of participants) so scores can fluctuate wildly based on a few more or a few less missed questions. Could be anything, poor instructions, skipped questions, a butterfly flying around.

Is it really that few questions? In my district they take them in second grade. My kid missed 8 out of 60 I think and still scored a 121 (90th percentile).

[Anonymous]

Sorry, that was poorly worded. By them, I meant to say the NNAT.

[Anonymous]

I'm the OP again. For those who asked, first NNAT administered in K was by the school so no major difference regarding test administration.

I email the first grade teacher to mention the huge differential (not sure she knew of the previous score) and to ask if there might be a reason for it. She said she didn't observe any issues when administering the test to my child. She then cc'd the school counselors to weigh in, but I've gotten no response.

I'm not going to sweat it too much. Child is doing well in school, which is what really matters. Still think it's odd for there to be such a big discrepancy, but obviously no tests are perfect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a short test (<50 questions) and the swing from median (50th percentile) to 2 standard deviations (98th percentile) is only 5 questions (last years numbers, raw number of questions could vary somewhat based on population of participants) so scores can fluctuate wildly based on a few more or a few less missed questions. Could be anything, poor instructions, skipped questions, a butterfly flying around.

This is exactly why using these tests to track kids for 6 years (3rd-8th grade) in FCPS is ridiculous.

They aren't. FCPS uses them as one piece of a referral packet. The teacher observations weigh heavily as do the work samples. I'm an administrator in FCPS, and we spend a lot of time discussing which kids demonstrate that they would be successful in a Level IV classroom. It is not just about the number. I know plenty of kids who came up with the "right" score but didn't have the classroom performance to match it. And conversely, I've seen plenty of kids who did not have the cut score, but demonstrated curiosity, strong work habits and/or creativity that supported a move to a Level IV classroom.

This is where I get confused. Kids who demonstrate curiosity, strong work habits and creativity will thrive and succeed in a regular classroom. Isn't AAP meant for kids who would not.

I have a 3rd grader who's in AAP. It was clear from a very early age that she is highly intelligent - well beyond her peers, learns and thinks in a very different way. Her tests scores confirmed this, but it wasn't even in question. She very clearly NEEDS a different learning environment than most other kids. She did not learn well in a traditional classroom.

Our youngest is currently in K and he is the curious and creative kid with strong work habits that the teachers all love. He's a pleaser and does really well in school, but he is not like his sister. I see no need for AAP for a kid like him because he does well in a traditional classroom.

If AAP isn't being used only for those who really need it than I wish the schools would reconsider the intent of this program and adjust admittance accordingly.

My daughter has definitely found a better groove and teachers better qualified to work with her, but there are many kids that still call her out on being "weird" along with some of her peers. Of course she is "weird" to them and this program should be for those kids only.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a short test (<50 questions) and the swing from median (50th percentile) to 2 standard deviations (98th percentile) is only 5 questions (last years numbers, raw number of questions could vary somewhat based on population of participants) so scores can fluctuate wildly based on a few more or a few less missed questions. Could be anything, poor instructions, skipped questions, a butterfly flying around.

This is exactly why using these tests to track kids for 6 years (3rd-8th grade) in FCPS is ridiculous.

They aren't. FCPS uses them as one piece of a referral packet. The teacher observations weigh heavily as do the work samples. I'm an administrator in FCPS, and we spend a lot of time discussing which kids demonstrate that they would be successful in a Level IV classroom. It is not just about the number. I know plenty of kids who came up with the "right" score but didn't have the classroom performance to match it. And conversely, I've seen plenty of kids who did not have the cut score, but demonstrated curiosity, strong work habits and/or creativity that supported a move to a Level IV classroom.

This is where I get confused. Kids who demonstrate curiosity, strong work habits and creativity will thrive and succeed in a regular classroom. Isn't AAP meant for kids who would not.

I have a 3rd grader who's in AAP. It was clear from a very early age that she is highly intelligent - well beyond her peers, learns and thinks in a very different way. Her tests scores confirmed this, but it wasn't even in question. She very clearly NEEDS a different learning environment than most other kids. She did not learn well in a traditional classroom.

Our youngest is currently in K and he is the curious and creative kid with strong work habits that the teachers all love. He's a pleaser and does really well in school, but he is not like his sister. I see no need for AAP for a kid like him because he does well in a traditional classroom.

If AAP isn't being used only for those who really need it than I wish the schools would reconsider the intent of this program and adjust admittance accordingly.

My daughter has definitely found a better groove and teachers better qualified to work with her, but there are many kids that still call her out on being "weird" along with some of her peers. Of course she is "weird" to them and this program should be for those kids only.

I agree. AAP has become a completely mainstreamed program in which many (if not most) of the kids would be right at home in a "traditional classroom". The entire intent of AAP has become completely distorted over the past years, as so many mainstream kids are admitted.