what is a great HOPE rating?

[Anonymous]

Obviously, being given "Always", or 6/6 on a likert scale would be the best.

But for AAP admission, do people have knowledge of what would be a minimum or average AAP student would need for entry?

[Anonymous]

It’s a brand new rating scale for AAP admission so no one really knows yet

[Anonymous]

It is brand new--nobody could possibly know. But do know that in recent years, kids needed a perfect or near perfect GBRS to get in.

[Anonymous]

All scaled ratings get turned into a numeric equivalent score. Those scores are put on a curve. The top x% is what was used for the GBRS to determine the cut off. Past audits have shown this to be around the 20% mark, give or take. I'm guessing something similar will get implemented again.

[Anonymous]

How does this promote equity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How does this promote equity?

Read the HOPE list and compare it to the old GBRS list.

[Anonymous]

Does FCPS have a sample on its website?

[Anonymous]

The list is kind of crazy. My child is crazy smart and exhibits all of that home, but is also very shy and is unlikely to exhibit those qualities in school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The list is kind of crazy. My child is crazy smart and exhibits all of that home, but is also very shy and is unlikely to exhibit those qualities in school.

I feel so bad for kids like this under HOPE. My current second grader should, by my naive reading of the scale, do great because she's an extreme extrovert who loves hanging out with adults and older kids because she's a youngest child. My older kids who have thrived in AAP and are quite strong academically would both have done horrible by the HOPE scale. I understand the whole thing is theoretically about equity and pulling in kids from underserved populations, but it reads like it's going to grab outgoing kids over smart kids.

I'm assuming AARTs and second grade teachers are going to work around the scale to try and recommend the same kids they would have under GBRS, because that seems like the right thing to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The list is kind of crazy. My child is crazy smart and exhibits all of that home, but is also very shy and is unlikely to exhibit those qualities in school.

I feel so bad for kids like this under HOPE. My current second grader should, by my naive reading of the scale, do great because she's an extreme extrovert who loves hanging out with adults and older kids because she's a youngest child. My older kids who have thrived in AAP and are quite strong academically would both have done horrible by the HOPE scale. I understand the whole thing is theoretically about equity and pulling in kids from underserved populations, but it reads like it's going to grab outgoing kids over smart kids.

I'm assuming AARTs and second grade teachers are going to work around the scale to try and recommend the same kids they would have under GBRS, because that seems like the right thing to do.

I appreciate that this is a well-intentioned comment, but this is exactly the kind of sentiment that shows the problem with having a subjective measure like GBRS or HOPE. If it's ultimately just what the AARTs and second grade teachers "feel", then why have this charade of subjective measurements? AAP eligibility sounds a lot like College Football Playoff rankings -- sure, you may have won games, but the only thing that ultimately matters is how a bunch of people on a committee "feel" about you at a single point in time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The list is kind of crazy. My child is crazy smart and exhibits all of that home, but is also very shy and is unlikely to exhibit those qualities in school.

I feel so bad for kids like this under HOPE. My current second grader should, by my naive reading of the scale, do great because she's an extreme extrovert who loves hanging out with adults and older kids because she's a youngest child. My older kids who have thrived in AAP and are quite strong academically would both have done horrible by the HOPE scale. I understand the whole thing is theoretically about equity and pulling in kids from underserved populations, but it reads like it's going to grab outgoing kids over smart kids.

I'm assuming AARTs and second grade teachers are going to work around the scale to try and recommend the same kids they would have under GBRS, because that seems like the right thing to do.

I appreciate that this is a well-intentioned comment, but this is exactly the kind of sentiment that shows the problem with having a subjective measure like GBRS or HOPE. If it's ultimately just what the AARTs and second grade teachers "feel", then why have this charade of subjective measurements? AAP eligibility sounds a lot like College Football Playoff rankings -- sure, you may have won games, but the only thing that ultimately matters is how a bunch of people on a committee "feel" about you at a single point in time.

Realistically I trust most ES teachers my kids have had to know when my kids need more academic challenge. There have been a few exceptions, but generally they have all had a pretty good idea of who my kids were.

Does the subjective process stink for some kids? Sure. But kids could also be horrible test takers and then using iReady, CoGAT, and NNAT more exclusively would stink for them too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The list is kind of crazy. My child is crazy smart and exhibits all of that home, but is also very shy and is unlikely to exhibit those qualities in school.

I feel so bad for kids like this under HOPE. My current second grader should, by my naive reading of the scale, do great because she's an extreme extrovert who loves hanging out with adults and older kids because she's a youngest child. My older kids who have thrived in AAP and are quite strong academically would both have done horrible by the HOPE scale. I understand the whole thing is theoretically about equity and pulling in kids from underserved populations, but it reads like it's going to grab outgoing kids over smart kids.

I'm assuming AARTs and second grade teachers are going to work around the scale to try and recommend the same kids they would have under GBRS, because that seems like the right thing to do.

I appreciate that this is a well-intentioned comment, but this is exactly the kind of sentiment that shows the problem with having a subjective measure like GBRS or HOPE. If it's ultimately just what the AARTs and second grade teachers "feel", then why have this charade of subjective measurements? AAP eligibility sounds a lot like College Football Playoff rankings -- sure, you may have won games, but the only thing that ultimately matters is how a bunch of people on a committee "feel" about you at a single point in time.

Realistically I trust most ES teachers my kids have had to know when my kids need more academic challenge. There have been a few exceptions, but generally they have all had a pretty good idea of who my kids were.

Does the subjective process stink for some kids? Sure. But kids could also be horrible test takers and then using iReady, CoGAT, and NNAT more exclusively would stink for them too.

The problem with subjective processes is that they always reinforce the status quo. Objective processes, while also flawed, at least allow for some movement for outsiders to become insiders. I think society benefits from allowing for more social mobility.

When a group creates a non-transparent and subjective process, it never ultimately ends well because it breeds resentment.

One other thing that FCPS should do in addition to having a more objective process is to get rid of artificial caps on the AAP program. If a kid meets the objective standard, the kid should just get in. No more of the artificial scarcity.

[Anonymous]

Sharing DC's ratings here: 7 (out of 11) Always, 1 Almost Always, 1 Often, 1 Sometimes - Shows compassion for others, 1 Rarely - Is a leader within his/her group of peers LOL.

5 areas (out of 8) show exceptional talent.

No idea if it's good or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sharing DC's ratings here: 7 (out of 11) Always, 1 Almost Always, 1 Often, 1 Sometimes - Shows compassion for others, 1 Rarely - Is a leader within his/her group of peers LOL.

5 areas (out of 8) show exceptional talent.

No idea if it's good or not.

Are you the person that stated teacher said good things about your child and being new to Fairfax? There are so many areas for the teacher to not select always. I wish there was the gbrs this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sharing DC's ratings here: 7 (out of 11) Always, 1 Almost Always, 1 Often, 1 Sometimes - Shows compassion for others, 1 Rarely - Is a leader within his/her group of peers LOL.

5 areas (out of 8) show exceptional talent.

No idea if it's good or not.

What about the write up space ? How much did they write