Is there a good reason to request child's AAP packet from the AART?

[Anonymous]

Aside from just being curious?

[Anonymous]

It won’t change anything, but it will give you a better sense of whether your child may be accepted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It won’t change anything, but it will give you a better sense of whether your child may be accepted.

Thanks. I'm asking for it and am bracing myself. I think my child deserves/needs these services but I don't have great confidence that the packet will be compelling. I've noticed some LA work coming home that is underwhelming, not for lack of ability but child's lack of understanding of what they want. DC is not one to read between the lines seems a bit distracted by the social scene in the classroom (lots of unruly behavior )

[Anonymous]

Yes if u need to appeal decision you will have info beforehand

[Anonymous]

I had 3 children get into AAP and I never did. But then again I never had to appeal. If I had to appeal I might have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had 3 children get into AAP and I never did. But then again I never had to appeal. If I had to appeal I might have.

I think with younger siblings coming along, it can be helpful to have the older kids' packets to gain some insight into what the committee looks at. In our case, though, the materials included changed quite a lot with the HOPE replacing GBRS and some of the other inputs were different for later kids. Still helpful though!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It won’t change anything, but it will give you a better sense of whether your child may be accepted.

Thanks. I'm asking for it and am bracing myself. I think my child deserves/needs these services but I don't have great confidence that the packet will be compelling. I've noticed some LA work coming home that is underwhelming, not for lack of ability but child's lack of understanding of what they want. DC is not one to read between the lines seems a bit distracted by the social scene in the classroom (lots of unruly behavior )

I received it and the HOPE has 2 A, 4 AA, and 5 O. And only one domain (math) checked for being exceptionally advanced. So is this the kiss of death? Other parts of application are fine and seem to bolster case for AAP. Test scores are decent but not in pool at this mid/high SES school (not in pool but NNAT 124 and CogAT 132).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It won’t change anything, but it will give you a better sense of whether your child may be accepted.

Thanks. I'm asking for it and am bracing myself. I think my child deserves/needs these services but I don't have great confidence that the packet will be compelling. I've noticed some LA work coming home that is underwhelming, not for lack of ability but child's lack of understanding of what they want. DC is not one to read between the lines seems a bit distracted by the social scene in the classroom (lots of unruly behavior )

I received it and the HOPE has 2 A, 4 AA, and 5 O. And only one domain (math) checked for being exceptionally advanced. So is this the kiss of death? Other parts of application are fine and seem to bolster case for AAP. Test scores are decent but not in pool at this mid/high SES school (not in pool but NNAT 124 and CogAT 132).

No idea what my kids' HOPE scores were, but 2 of the 3 got in with similar test stats while not being in-pool, good grades, and good reading/math scores (iReady was only used for 1, and the 1 it was used for was 89th percentile and not even level II for math, which our school used as an indicator that the kids will likely be in AAP).

We were a mid-SES school. And the AAP curriculum has been perfect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It won’t change anything, but it will give you a better sense of whether your child may be accepted.

Thanks. I'm asking for it and am bracing myself. I think my child deserves/needs these services but I don't have great confidence that the packet will be compelling. I've noticed some LA work coming home that is underwhelming, not for lack of ability but child's lack of understanding of what they want. DC is not one to read between the lines seems a bit distracted by the social scene in the classroom (lots of unruly behavior )

I received it and the HOPE has 2 A, 4 AA, and 5 O. And only one domain (math) checked for being exceptionally advanced. So is this the kiss of death? Other parts of application are fine and seem to bolster case for AAP. Test scores are decent but not in pool at this mid/high SES school (not in pool but NNAT 124 and CogAT 132).

No idea what my kids' HOPE scores were, but 2 of the 3 got in with similar test stats while not being in-pool, good grades, and good reading/math scores (iReady was only used for 1, and the 1 it was used for was 89th percentile and not even level II for math, which our school used as an indicator that the kids will likely be in AAP).

We were a mid-SES school. And the AAP curriculum has been perfect.

Hmm. Well it could be because the HOPE scores were so damned good in your case. I don't know what "good" or "excellent" HOPE scores look like, but I'm worried that only math was selected as advanced relative to peers. VALLS was included and DC scored 719 but no previous I-Readys included (DC is new at this school this year), which would have bolstered case that DC is advanced in literacy. CogAT verbal was not exceptional but I think that underrepresents DC's verbal skills.

Might have to bite the bullet and schedule a WISC...

[Anonymous]

I requested it because I have a younger child and I'm curious about HOPE and school work samples. BTW my child was in-pool and was admitted on the first round.

HOPE score was bad, nothing more than often and one rarely. I was angry because that's not the child I know. I understand there is no way to fight it except on appeal, and since my child was admitted on the first round, I am warning you you might get a few weeks of anxiety.

The school work samples were quite illuminating, they track with FCPS 8 creative thinking strategy quite literally. Like they are designed to show children's thinking in point of view, information organization etc. Still I think home provided samples should not repeat that but to provide another aspect of child's thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It won’t change anything, but it will give you a better sense of whether your child may be accepted.

Thanks. I'm asking for it and am bracing myself. I think my child deserves/needs these services but I don't have great confidence that the packet will be compelling. I've noticed some LA work coming home that is underwhelming, not for lack of ability but child's lack of understanding of what they want. DC is not one to read between the lines seems a bit distracted by the social scene in the classroom (lots of unruly behavior )

I received it and the HOPE has 2 A, 4 AA, and 5 O. And only one domain (math) checked for being exceptionally advanced. So is this the kiss of death? Other parts of application are fine and seem to bolster case for AAP. Test scores are decent but not in pool at this mid/high SES school (not in pool but NNAT 124 and CogAT 132).

No idea what my kids' HOPE scores were, but 2 of the 3 got in with similar test stats while not being in-pool, good grades, and good reading/math scores (iReady was only used for 1, and the 1 it was used for was 89th percentile and not even level II for math, which our school used as an indicator that the kids will likely be in AAP).

We were a mid-SES school. And the AAP curriculum has been perfect.

Hmm. Well it could be because the HOPE scores were so damned good in your case. I don't know what "good" or "excellent" HOPE scores look like, but I'm worried that only math was selected as advanced relative to peers. VALLS was included and DC scored 719 but no previous I-Readys included (DC is new at this school this year), which would have bolstered case that DC is advanced in literacy. CogAT verbal was not exceptional but I think that underrepresents DC's verbal skills.

Might have to bite the bullet and schedule a WISC...

I would in your situation. The HOPE is good (but not outstanding). The VALLS is nearly perfect, but who knows what to make of that because they only conclude about whether the kid might develop a reading issue. (It is also subject to big swings in score/conclusion as we found.). Do you have any standardized testing from last year at your child's previous school? If you think the CogAT was not accurate and you do not have other testing to include, I would do the WISC if you can work it in and it's in the budget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It won’t change anything, but it will give you a better sense of whether your child may be accepted.

Thanks. I'm asking for it and am bracing myself. I think my child deserves/needs these services but I don't have great confidence that the packet will be compelling. I've noticed some LA work coming home that is underwhelming, not for lack of ability but child's lack of understanding of what they want. DC is not one to read between the lines seems a bit distracted by the social scene in the classroom (lots of unruly behavior )

I received it and the HOPE has 2 A, 4 AA, and 5 O. And only one domain (math) checked for being exceptionally advanced. So is this the kiss of death? Other parts of application are fine and seem to bolster case for AAP. Test scores are decent but not in pool at this mid/high SES school (not in pool but NNAT 124 and CogAT 132).

No idea what my kids' HOPE scores were, but 2 of the 3 got in with similar test stats while not being in-pool, good grades, and good reading/math scores (iReady was only used for 1, and the 1 it was used for was 89th percentile and not even level II for math, which our school used as an indicator that the kids will likely be in AAP).

We were a mid-SES school. And the AAP curriculum has been perfect.

Hmm. Well it could be because the HOPE scores were so damned good in your case. I don't know what "good" or "excellent" HOPE scores look like, but I'm worried that only math was selected as advanced relative to peers. VALLS was included and DC scored 719 but no previous I-Readys included (DC is new at this school this year), which would have bolstered case that DC is advanced in literacy. CogAT verbal was not exceptional but I think that underrepresents DC's verbal skills.

Might have to bite the bullet and schedule a WISC...

I would in your situation. The HOPE is good (but not outstanding). The VALLS is nearly perfect, but who knows what to make of that because they only conclude about whether the kid might develop a reading issue. (It is also subject to big swings in score/conclusion as we found.). Do you have any standardized testing from last year at your child's previous school? If you think the CogAT was not accurate and you do not have other testing to include, I would do the WISC if you can work it in and it's in the budget.

Why isn't "2 A, 4 AA, and 5 O" a great HOPE score? That seems great to me. Teachers are all going to be filling out this form differently. Are they really going to reject a child because he "often" is "sensitive to larger issues of deeper concern" versus "always"? These categories are crazy to me. They need a different way to get the teacher's true opinion rather than these categories. I hope the committee tries to understand what the teacher really thinks instead of marking off how many "always" scores the child got.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It won’t change anything, but it will give you a better sense of whether your child may be accepted.

Thanks. I'm asking for it and am bracing myself. I think my child deserves/needs these services but I don't have great confidence that the packet will be compelling. I've noticed some LA work coming home that is underwhelming, not for lack of ability but child's lack of understanding of what they want. DC is not one to read between the lines seems a bit distracted by the social scene in the classroom (lots of unruly behavior )

I received it and the HOPE has 2 A, 4 AA, and 5 O. And only one domain (math) checked for being exceptionally advanced. So is this the kiss of death? Other parts of application are fine and seem to bolster case for AAP. Test scores are decent but not in pool at this mid/high SES school (not in pool but NNAT 124 and CogAT 132).

No idea what my kids' HOPE scores were, but 2 of the 3 got in with similar test stats while not being in-pool, good grades, and good reading/math scores (iReady was only used for 1, and the 1 it was used for was 89th percentile and not even level II for math, which our school used as an indicator that the kids will likely be in AAP).

We were a mid-SES school. And the AAP curriculum has been perfect.

Hmm. Well it could be because the HOPE scores were so damned good in your case. I don't know what "good" or "excellent" HOPE scores look like, but I'm worried that only math was selected as advanced relative to peers. VALLS was included and DC scored 719 but no previous I-Readys included (DC is new at this school this year), which would have bolstered case that DC is advanced in literacy. CogAT verbal was not exceptional but I think that underrepresents DC's verbal skills.

Might have to bite the bullet and schedule a WISC...

I would in your situation. The HOPE is good (but not outstanding). The VALLS is nearly perfect, but who knows what to make of that because they only conclude about whether the kid might develop a reading issue. (It is also subject to big swings in score/conclusion as we found.). Do you have any standardized testing from last year at your child's previous school? If you think the CogAT was not accurate and you do not have other testing to include, I would do the WISC if you can work it in and it's in the budget.

Thank you. It's not really in the budget but we'll do the WISC anyway. Need to at least try.

We have I-Readys from the previous school that were solid and I'm not sure why the current school didn't include them. Also the packet doesn't seem to mention that DC is receiving LII in LA and math (but on the HOPE they only say DC is remarkable in math... )

I think DC's CogAT is somewhat accurate in that math is stronger than verbal but verbal is still solid but DC doesn't do great on tests. Is not a perfectionist, can make careless mistakes. So I worry the WISC isn't going to support the case but will nevertheless try as it will tell us more about DC's strengths/weaknesses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It won’t change anything, but it will give you a better sense of whether your child may be accepted.

Thanks. I'm asking for it and am bracing myself. I think my child deserves/needs these services but I don't have great confidence that the packet will be compelling. I've noticed some LA work coming home that is underwhelming, not for lack of ability but child's lack of understanding of what they want. DC is not one to read between the lines seems a bit distracted by the social scene in the classroom (lots of unruly behavior )

I received it and the HOPE has 2 A, 4 AA, and 5 O. And only one domain (math) checked for being exceptionally advanced. So is this the kiss of death? Other parts of application are fine and seem to bolster case for AAP. Test scores are decent but not in pool at this mid/high SES school (not in pool but NNAT 124 and CogAT 132).

No idea what my kids' HOPE scores were, but 2 of the 3 got in with similar test stats while not being in-pool, good grades, and good reading/math scores (iReady was only used for 1, and the 1 it was used for was 89th percentile and not even level II for math, which our school used as an indicator that the kids will likely be in AAP).

We were a mid-SES school. And the AAP curriculum has been perfect.

Hmm. Well it could be because the HOPE scores were so damned good in your case. I don't know what "good" or "excellent" HOPE scores look like, but I'm worried that only math was selected as advanced relative to peers. VALLS was included and DC scored 719 but no previous I-Readys included (DC is new at this school this year), which would have bolstered case that DC is advanced in literacy. CogAT verbal was not exceptional but I think that underrepresents DC's verbal skills.

Might have to bite the bullet and schedule a WISC...

I would in your situation. The HOPE is good (but not outstanding). The VALLS is nearly perfect, but who knows what to make of that because they only conclude about whether the kid might develop a reading issue. (It is also subject to big swings in score/conclusion as we found.). Do you have any standardized testing from last year at your child's previous school? If you think the CogAT was not accurate and you do not have other testing to include, I would do the WISC if you can work it in and it's in the budget.

Why isn't "2 A, 4 AA, and 5 O" a great HOPE score? That seems great to me. Teachers are all going to be filling out this form differently. Are they really going to reject a child because he "often" is "sensitive to larger issues of deeper concern" versus "always"? These categories are crazy to me. They need a different way to get the teacher's true opinion rather than these categories. I hope the committee tries to understand what the teacher really thinks instead of marking off how many "always" scores the child got.

I'm the poster whose child has these scores and I wasn't sure how they'd be interpreted either. I agree with you that they are pretty good but that a cmte might discount them/might be looking for number of "always"...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I requested it because I have a younger child and I'm curious about HOPE and school work samples. BTW my child was in-pool and was admitted on the first round.

HOPE score was bad, nothing more than often and one rarely. I was angry because that's not the child I know. I understand there is no way to fight it except on appeal, and since my child was admitted on the first round, I am warning you you might get a few weeks of anxiety.

The school work samples were quite illuminating, they track with FCPS 8 creative thinking strategy quite literally. Like they are designed to show children's thinking in point of view, information organization etc. Still I think home provided samples should not repeat that but to provide another aspect of child's thinking.

Thanks! I relate to this. I am also surprised at how the school examples are tracking the 8 creative thinking strategies so literally. I thought what they submitted on DC's behalf was ok but not amazing but maybe the committee knows better than me. My submitted samples were nicer and exhibited more creative/advanced thinking, imho.