GT notification letters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest surprise for DS (which I didn't show him) is that his Teacher Survey was below threshold. His teacher this year loves him and was downright effusive the few times we have run into each other coming and going. I'm surprised the survey wasn't at least at threshold. He's your average 9 yo with no behavior issues. Now I'm second guessing everything.

Similar situation for us.

What's the teacher survey? I don't think I've ever seen this. Is it part of the report card?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest surprise for DS (which I didn't show him) is that his Teacher Survey was below threshold. His teacher this year loves him and was downright effusive the few times we have run into each other coming and going. I'm surprised the survey wasn't at least at threshold. He's your average 9 yo with no behavior issues. Now I'm second guessing everything.

Similar situation for us.

What's the teacher survey? I don't think I've ever seen this. Is it part of the report card?

They don't typically report the teacher survey or staff advocacy (if conducted) results to parents except in the GT letter. It's one of the non-test factors, along with the parent GT identification survey. "One of" because some time ago they found that teachers, even genuinely trying, don't always have reliable enough underatanding of each student's competencies to be a single point of failure in the GT identification process, so parents/guardians or staff (assistant principal, reading specialist, music teacher, etc ) who notice something special about a student can establish equally that portion of the identification.

Look at the current year criteria/explainer, here:

https://bit.ly/gt-identification-2022

Given the note about single points of failure, one wonders if they've created too narrow a funnel this year, given the general unpreparedness for the EOLs/district assessments that was seen across the system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest surprise for DS (which I didn't show him) is that his Teacher Survey was below threshold. His teacher this year loves him and was downright effusive the few times we have run into each other coming and going. I'm surprised the survey wasn't at least at threshold. He's your average 9 yo with no behavior issues. Now I'm second guessing everything.

Did you look at the report cards to see where DS might not have done as well as you thought? Did anything trend in the wrong direction?

Same with my child. Met all the testing metrics no problem, straight As, but no teacher rec.

Is the teacher survey the same as the parent survey questions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest surprise for DS (which I didn't show him) is that his Teacher Survey was below threshold. His teacher this year loves him and was downright effusive the few times we have run into each other coming and going. I'm surprised the survey wasn't at least at threshold. He's your average 9 yo with no behavior issues. Now I'm second guessing everything.

Did you look at the report cards to see where DS might not have done as well as you thought? Did anything trend in the wrong direction?

Same with my child. Met all the testing metrics no problem, straight As, but no teacher rec.

Is the teacher survey the same as the parent survey questions?

Very similar questions

[Anonymous]

My issue with GT testing in mcps is that they’re not actually screening for giftedness. There is no cognitive assessment. They cherry pick some random grades from marking period 2 and use that to determine who is GT? Lol. No. That’a screening for good grades.

Gifted children aren’t necessarily straight A students. They are neurodivergent, they learn differently. Little to no repetition. Intuitive. Creative. Out of the box thinkers. Often intense, sensitive, emotional, passionate. They often struggle with the pace of classroom instruction. Being gifted is both wonderful and difficult.

According to mcps, gifted = a kid with good grades

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My issue with GT testing in mcps is that they’re not actually screening for giftedness. There is no cognitive assessment. They cherry pick some random grades from marking period 2 and use that to determine who is GT? Lol. No. That’a screening for good grades.

Gifted children aren’t necessarily straight A students. They are neurodivergent, they learn differently. Little to no repetition. Intuitive. Creative. Out of the box thinkers. Often intense, sensitive, emotional, passionate. They often struggle with the pace of classroom instruction. Being gifted is both wonderful and difficult.

According to mcps, gifted = a kid with good grades

Maybe that's why this designation isn't actually used other than "to provide additional data." Everyone knows it's just echoing grades and test scores, but the state makes them go through the motions.

But in their defense, could you imagine MoCo parents if the county tried to identify gifted children in the original sense that PP describes? Finding a way to quantify creativity and intuition and orthogonal thinking and then defend their decision to angry parents? Ugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My issue with GT testing in mcps is that they’re not actually screening for giftedness. There is no cognitive assessment. They cherry pick some random grades from marking period 2 and use that to determine who is GT? Lol. No. That’a screening for good grades.

Gifted children aren’t necessarily straight A students. They are neurodivergent, they learn differently. Little to no repetition. Intuitive. Creative. Out of the box thinkers. Often intense, sensitive, emotional, passionate. They often struggle with the pace of classroom instruction. Being gifted is both wonderful and difficult.

According to mcps, gifted = a kid with good grades

Maybe that's why this designation isn't actually used other than "to provide additional data." Everyone knows it's just echoing grades and test scores, but the state makes them go through the motions.

But in their defense, could you imagine MoCo parents if the county tried to identify gifted children in the original sense that PP describes? Finding a way to quantify creativity and intuition and orthogonal thinking and then defend their decision to angry parents? Ugh.

The issue with mcps is that they’re not transparent. Use an actual IQ test to determine giftedness. Share score reports with parents. End of discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My issue with GT testing in mcps is that they’re not actually screening for giftedness. There is no cognitive assessment. They cherry pick some random grades from marking period 2 and use that to determine who is GT? Lol. No. That’a screening for good grades.

Gifted children aren’t necessarily straight A students. They are neurodivergent, they learn differently. Little to no repetition. Intuitive. Creative. Out of the box thinkers. Often intense, sensitive, emotional, passionate. They often struggle with the pace of classroom instruction. Being gifted is both wonderful and difficult.

According to mcps, gifted = a kid with good grades

+1 (Though in their defense with covid they gave up COGAT and had to come up with an alternative- I don't envy them their jobs).
And such a good description of gifted children- most people think it's all about the intellectual capability and how they (will) have it easy; but with it comes so much emotional intensity, passion, creativity, etc. Most people also miss how difficult it can be for both the kids and the parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My issue with GT testing in mcps is that they’re not actually screening for giftedness. There is no cognitive assessment. They cherry pick some random grades from marking period 2 and use that to determine who is GT? Lol. No. That’a screening for good grades.

Gifted children aren’t necessarily straight A students. They are neurodivergent, they learn differently. Little to no repetition. Intuitive. Creative. Out of the box thinkers. Often intense, sensitive, emotional, passionate. They often struggle with the pace of classroom instruction. Being gifted is both wonderful and difficult.

According to mcps, gifted = a kid with good grades

Maybe that's why this designation isn't actually used other than "to provide additional data." Everyone knows it's just echoing grades and test scores, but the state makes them go through the motions.

But in their defense, could you imagine MoCo parents if the county tried to identify gifted children in the original sense that PP describes? Finding a way to quantify creativity and intuition and orthogonal thinking and then defend their decision to angry parents? Ugh.

The issue with mcps is that they’re not transparent. Use an actual IQ test to determine giftedness. Share score reports with parents. End of discussion.

Insanely expensive. Next!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The biggest surprise for DS (which I didn't show him) is that his Teacher Survey was below threshold. His teacher this year loves him and was downright effusive the few times we have run into each other coming and going. I'm surprised the survey wasn't at least at threshold. He's your average 9 yo with no behavior issues. Now I'm second guessing everything.

There are only two options- below threshold and at or above threshold.
The threshold is for showing gifted characteristics, not being a good student or well behaved. Many traits of giftedness can be perceived by society as negative (bossy, gets stuck on one thing, perfectionism)
They do a survey like the parent form and it gets “scored” based on those characteristics. Not that there may be some cases of teacher bias here, but in general I think it speaks to a teacher answering honestly if a kid they generally like is not automatically marked at the highest- it actually shows the teacher considered the questions and answered honestly. Many great kids are not gifted, doesn’t mean they aren’t great kids or great students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest surprise for DS (which I didn't show him) is that his Teacher Survey was below threshold. His teacher this year loves him and was downright effusive the few times we have run into each other coming and going. I'm surprised the survey wasn't at least at threshold. He's your average 9 yo with no behavior issues. Now I'm second guessing everything.

There are only two options- below threshold and at or above threshold.
The threshold is for showing gifted characteristics, not being a good student or well behaved. Many traits of giftedness can be perceived by society as negative (bossy, gets stuck on one thing, perfectionism)
They do a survey like the parent form and it gets “scored” based on those characteristics. Not that there may be some cases of teacher bias here, but in general I think it speaks to a teacher answering honestly if a kid they generally like is not automatically marked at the highest- it actually shows the teacher considered the questions and answered honestly. Many great kids are not gifted, doesn’t mean they aren’t great kids or great students.

Also, being a "good student" at this age isn't really that difficult. Test scores are somewhat more meaningful. I always find it hilarious when someone puts "my child is an honor student at ____ elementary school" on their car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My issue with GT testing in mcps is that they’re not actually screening for giftedness. There is no cognitive assessment. They cherry pick some random grades from marking period 2 and use that to determine who is GT? Lol. No. That’a screening for good grades.

Gifted children aren’t necessarily straight A students. They are neurodivergent, they learn differently. Little to no repetition. Intuitive. Creative. Out of the box thinkers. Often intense, sensitive, emotional, passionate. They often struggle with the pace of classroom instruction. Being gifted is both wonderful and difficult.

According to mcps, gifted = a kid with good grades

Maybe that's why this designation isn't actually used other than "to provide additional data." Everyone knows it's just echoing grades and test scores, but the state makes them go through the motions.

But in their defense, could you imagine MoCo parents if the county tried to identify gifted children in the original sense that PP describes? Finding a way to quantify creativity and intuition and orthogonal thinking and then defend their decision to angry parents? Ugh.

The issue with mcps is that they’re not transparent. Use an actual IQ test to determine giftedness. Share score reports with parents. End of discussion.

Insanely expensive. Next!

Or return to CogAT or similar. Is that also insanely expensive? How expensive is it to identify conditions that end up requiring IEPs? Is it bad to be sure to identify those needs and meet them? If not, why is it OK to fail to be sure to identify GT needs and meet them, as well? Using grades and tests of academic achievement in the absence of some measure of intelligence/underlying ability is pretty unreliable in this regard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My issue with GT testing in mcps is that they’re not actually screening for giftedness. There is no cognitive assessment. They cherry pick some random grades from marking period 2 and use that to determine who is GT? Lol. No. That’a screening for good grades.

Gifted children aren’t necessarily straight A students. They are neurodivergent, they learn differently. Little to no repetition. Intuitive. Creative. Out of the box thinkers. Often intense, sensitive, emotional, passionate. They often struggle with the pace of classroom instruction. Being gifted is both wonderful and difficult.

According to mcps, gifted = a kid with good grades

Maybe that's why this designation isn't actually used other than "to provide additional data." Everyone knows it's just echoing grades and test scores, but the state makes them go through the motions.

But in their defense, could you imagine MoCo parents if the county tried to identify gifted children in the original sense that PP describes? Finding a way to quantify creativity and intuition and orthogonal thinking and then defend their decision to angry parents? Ugh.

The issue with mcps is that they’re not transparent. Use an actual IQ test to determine giftedness. Share score reports with parents. End of discussion.

Insanely expensive. Next!

Or return to CogAT or similar. Is that also insanely expensive? How expensive is it to identify conditions that end up requiring IEPs? Is it bad to be sure to identify those needs and meet them? If not, why is it OK to fail to be sure to identify GT needs and meet them, as well? Using grades and tests of academic achievement in the absence of some measure of intelligence/underlying ability is pretty unreliable in this regard.

+1000. MCPS, are you there? bring back CogAT. You are doing a disservice to kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My issue with GT testing in mcps is that they’re not actually screening for giftedness. There is no cognitive assessment. They cherry pick some random grades from marking period 2 and use that to determine who is GT? Lol. No. That’a screening for good grades.

Gifted children aren’t necessarily straight A students. They are neurodivergent, they learn differently. Little to no repetition. Intuitive. Creative. Out of the box thinkers. Often intense, sensitive, emotional, passionate. They often struggle with the pace of classroom instruction. Being gifted is both wonderful and difficult.

According to mcps, gifted = a kid with good grades

Maybe that's why this designation isn't actually used other than "to provide additional data." Everyone knows it's just echoing grades and test scores, but the state makes them go through the motions.

But in their defense, could you imagine MoCo parents if the county tried to identify gifted children in the original sense that PP describes? Finding a way to quantify creativity and intuition and orthogonal thinking and then defend their decision to angry parents? Ugh.

It’s not a money issue. Until 2020 there was always a cognitive assessment used as part of the GT screening process. Now mcps is using covid as an excuse to do weird things. They invented a whole new measure “EOL district assessments” and invited the scoring technique, which they did not share with school staff or parents. Something smells very fishy.

The issue with mcps is that they’re not transparent. Use an actual IQ test to determine giftedness. Share score reports with parents. End of discussion.

Insanely expensive. Next!

Or return to CogAT or similar. Is that also insanely expensive? How expensive is it to identify conditions that end up requiring IEPs? Is it bad to be sure to identify those needs and meet them? If not, why is it OK to fail to be sure to identify GT needs and meet them, as well? Using grades and tests of academic achievement in the absence of some measure of intelligence/underlying ability is pretty unreliable in this regard.

+1000. MCPS, are you there? bring back CogAT. You are doing a disservice to kids.

[Anonymous]

Mcps created “EOL district assessments” and invented their own scoring technique and is keeping it all a secret from school staff and parents. How on earth is this okay??? Parents should be furious. Hold mcps accountable. You don’t get to secretly manipulate our students’ data and get away with it. Come on!