Subject Specific Screening?

[Anonymous]

So our daughter did not get into AAP, and after looking at the scores posted on this page, I totally understand why.

With that said, they just did subject-specific screening for all four and she did not get into any (I presumed no math, but thought she'd be competitive for the other 3).

Given there is no iReady or standardized assessment for SS/science, I am unclear how they reached their determination. The AAP lady said it was "We use work samples, HOPE scale, ability scores. Specifically, we look at if a student shows exceptional talent beyond their same age peers."

Literally every assessment that has ever come home this year for SS/science she has "scored" 100%. Her HOPE score was high, based on my understanding. And I keep asking how they determine "exceptional talent" and she's not responding.

(I also think her iReady/other scores should qualify her for reading/phonics, but at least I can see that those are objective data points and can be easily compared so I dont think i'll fight it).

Thoughts? This is our first year (2nd grade) going through this and I really feel like my daughter should have the chance.

Thank you.

[Anonymous]

What areas was she marked for exceptional talent in that section of the HOPE report? If you're really invested, you could bring those areas up with the AART.

Honestly, though, if you poke around on this board you'll see that subject specific differentiation is mostly a label to pacify you as a parent. Our principal literally said it's just the normal differentiation that would happen anyway - a few extra worksheets. Part time might be more valuable, depending on the AART and the school. However, with AART positions being reduced next year that might change as well.

[Anonymous]

Also what school are you at? If in ES that goes into one of the MS that sends 50+ kids to TJ, peers are all those TJ kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What areas was she marked for exceptional talent in that section of the HOPE report? If you're really invested, you could bring those areas up with the AART.

Honestly, though, if you poke around on this board you'll see that subject specific differentiation is mostly a label to pacify you as a parent. Our principal literally said it's just the normal differentiation that would happen anyway - a few extra worksheets. Part time might be more valuable, depending on the AART and the school. However, with AART positions being reduced next year that might change as well.

That's part of the problem - nothing was marked "exceptional" but i'm unclear how that determination is made (absent standardized test scores). Every assignment on SS/Science she has scored perfectly (like in-class quizzes). So it feels very subjective.

Our AART said that subject specific was more "intensive" than part time - part time is like one hour per week or something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also what school are you at? If in ES that goes into one of the MS that sends 50+ kids to TJ, peers are all those TJ kids.

Definitely not. Without outing our AART, we are in Burke/Springfield area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What areas was she marked for exceptional talent in that section of the HOPE report? If you're really invested, you could bring those areas up with the AART.

Honestly, though, if you poke around on this board you'll see that subject specific differentiation is mostly a label to pacify you as a parent. Our principal literally said it's just the normal differentiation that would happen anyway - a few extra worksheets. Part time might be more valuable, depending on the AART and the school. However, with AART positions being reduced next year that might change as well.

That's part of the problem - nothing was marked "exceptional" but i'm unclear how that determination is made (absent standardized test scores). Every assignment on SS/Science she has scored perfectly (like in-class quizzes). So it feels very subjective.

Our AART said that subject specific was more "intensive" than part time - part time is like one hour per week or something.

Subject specific and part time vary wildly by school, so that might be true at yours. It will also depend on what you feel is intensive, as the part time designation is generally a one-hour critical thinking pull out and subject-specific will be more content-focused, regardless of how it's implemented.

The HOPE is absolutely subjective - it's a picture of what your student's teacher and the AART see or believe they see in the classroom. Unfortunately, since those are the individuals largely determining local placements I'm not sure what recourse you have beyond further discussion with them or escalating to the principal.

Good luck, OP. I hope your daughter receives the instruction she needs next year!

[Anonymous]

Join the PTO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So our daughter did not get into AAP, and after looking at the scores posted on this page, I totally understand why.

With that said, they just did subject-specific screening for all four and she did not get into any (I presumed no math, but thought she'd be competitive for the other 3).

Given there is no iReady or standardized assessment for SS/science, I am unclear how they reached their determination. The AAP lady said it was "We use work samples, HOPE scale, ability scores. Specifically, we look at if a student shows exceptional talent beyond their same age peers."

Literally every assessment that has ever come home this year for SS/science she has "scored" 100%. Her HOPE score was high, based on my understanding. And I keep asking how they determine "exceptional talent" and she's not responding.

(I also think her iReady/other scores should qualify her for reading/phonics, but at least I can see that those are objective data points and can be easily compared so I dont think i'll fight it).

Thoughts? This is our first year (2nd grade) going through this and I really feel like my daughter should have the chance.

Thank you.

I don't know what subject specific screening you are talking about. Our ES offered LII for math and LA only, there was nothing for science or social studies.

As for how they might screen, my kid was in AAP with the GBRSs. I saw the write up they did for him in each of the categories. The teachers were making comments about how he was reading books in free time about areas they were studying that he was interested in. They mentioned how he would bring in examples of knowledge he had from home (museums, shows he watched with us, books we read at home). He had high scores in his schoolwork but their examples showed how he had moved beyond the in class work and incorporated things he had learned in other places. Maybe your daughter is doing great in the classroom but is not taking that extra step?

I had a quiet kid who had to be persuaded to answer questions, the teachers were commenting on their observations and what they got from him with some gentle hudging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So our daughter did not get into AAP, and after looking at the scores posted on this page, I totally understand why.

With that said, they just did subject-specific screening for all four and she did not get into any (I presumed no math, but thought she'd be competitive for the other 3).

Given there is no iReady or standardized assessment for SS/science, I am unclear how they reached their determination. The AAP lady said it was "We use work samples, HOPE scale, ability scores. Specifically, we look at if a student shows exceptional talent beyond their same age peers."

Literally every assessment that has ever come home this year for SS/science she has "scored" 100%. Her HOPE score was high, based on my understanding. And I keep asking how they determine "exceptional talent" and she's not responding.

(I also think her iReady/other scores should qualify her for reading/phonics, but at least I can see that those are objective data points and can be easily compared so I dont think i'll fight it).

Thoughts? This is our first year (2nd grade) going through this and I really feel like my daughter should have the chance.

Thank you.

I don't know what subject specific screening you are talking about. Our ES offered LII for math and LA only, there was nothing for science or social studies.

As for how they might screen, my kid was in AAP with the GBRSs. I saw the write up they did for him in each of the categories. The teachers were making comments about how he was reading books in free time about areas they were studying that he was interested in. They mentioned how he would bring in examples of knowledge he had from home (museums, shows he watched with us, books we read at home). He had high scores in his schoolwork but their examples showed how he had moved beyond the in class work and incorporated things he had learned in other places. Maybe your daughter is doing great in the classroom but is not taking that extra step?

I had a quiet kid who had to be persuaded to answer questions, the teachers were commenting on their observations and what they got from him with some gentle hudging.

Agree - subject specific is usually LA and Math only.

[Anonymous]

As a parent of a kid who was rejected in second grade from full time AAP, who did receive a designation for subject specific enrichment (only offered for reading and math at our school, but she was put in for both), I can tell you it was completely meaningless. Apparently our school just switched to the 5th grade advanced math track, so she didn't even get accelerated math. No pullouts. Never worked with the AART. The teachers didn't have time to do enrichment for the kids who are above average, just those who struggle. It was a big fat nothing burger.

A couple of months in, my kid's teacher got with the level IV third grade teacher and they put together a study group of kids who needed enrichment. They sent that small group into the level IV classroom daily, and my kid really loved that. But my understanding was that this was at the discretion of the teachers and didn't involve our AART at all.

In our case, when we reapplied for level IV this year (3rd grade) she got in without issue. Massive change in her HOPE score and the teacher work samples were miles better (and more of them) than last year. She did already have high scores on the intelligence tests. The difference in teacher packets was kind of astounding. Evidence that having a teacher who "gets" your kid makes all the difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a parent of a kid who was rejected in second grade from full time AAP, who did receive a designation for subject specific enrichment (only offered for reading and math at our school, but she was put in for both), I can tell you it was completely meaningless. Apparently our school just switched to the 5th grade advanced math track, so she didn't even get accelerated math. No pullouts. Never worked with the AART. The teachers didn't have time to do enrichment for the kids who are above average, just those who struggle. It was a big fat nothing burger.

A couple of months in, my kid's teacher got with the level IV third grade teacher and they put together a study group of kids who needed enrichment. They sent that small group into the level IV classroom daily, and my kid really loved that. But my understanding was that this was at the discretion of the teachers and didn't involve our AART at all.

In our case, when we reapplied for level IV this year (3rd grade) she got in without issue. Massive change in her HOPE score and the teacher work samples were miles better (and more of them) than last year. She did already have high scores on the intelligence tests. The difference in teacher packets was kind of astounding. Evidence that having a teacher who "gets" your kid makes all the difference.

My kids at a base/center have in some grades had kids from gen ed pushing into AAP and other grades not, so this tracks with what this PP said. And like PP I don't know that the AART was involved. It seemed to be more about the teaching team.

Advanced math was different and based on testing. But there were push in kids for reading and history/science some years too. I distinctly remember it happening in 4th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So our daughter did not get into AAP, and after looking at the scores posted on this page, I totally understand why.

With that said, they just did subject-specific screening for all four and she did not get into any (I presumed no math, but thought she'd be competitive for the other 3).

Given there is no iReady or standardized assessment for SS/science, I am unclear how they reached their determination. The AAP lady said it was "We use work samples, HOPE scale, ability scores. Specifically, we look at if a student shows exceptional talent beyond their same age peers."

Literally every assessment that has ever come home this year for SS/science she has "scored" 100%. Her HOPE score was high, based on my understanding. And I keep asking how they determine "exceptional talent" and she's not responding.

(I also think her iReady/other scores should qualify her for reading/phonics, but at least I can see that those are objective data points and can be easily compared so I dont think i'll fight it).

Thoughts? This is our first year (2nd grade) going through this and I really feel like my daughter should have the chance.

Thank you.

I don't know what subject specific screening you are talking about. Our ES offered LII for math and LA only, there was nothing for science or social studies.

As for how they might screen, my kid was in AAP with the GBRSs. I saw the write up they did for him in each of the categories. The teachers were making comments about how he was reading books in free time about areas they were studying that he was interested in. They mentioned how he would bring in examples of knowledge he had from home (museums, shows he watched with us, books we read at home). He had high scores in his schoolwork but their examples showed how he had moved beyond the in class work and incorporated things he had learned in other places. Maybe your daughter is doing great in the classroom but is not taking that extra step?

I had a quiet kid who had to be persuaded to answer questions, the teachers were commenting on their observations and what they got from him with some gentle hudging.

We were advised by our AART that they screen for four subjects - math, literacy, science and social studies. I'm baffled by the notion that this is different school by school. Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a parent of a kid who was rejected in second grade from full time AAP, who did receive a designation for subject specific enrichment (only offered for reading and math at our school, but she was put in for both), I can tell you it was completely meaningless. Apparently our school just switched to the 5th grade advanced math track, so she didn't even get accelerated math. No pullouts. Never worked with the AART. The teachers didn't have time to do enrichment for the kids who are above average, just those who struggle. It was a big fat nothing burger.

A couple of months in, my kid's teacher got with the level IV third grade teacher and they put together a study group of kids who needed enrichment. They sent that small group into the level IV classroom daily, and my kid really loved that. But my understanding was that this was at the discretion of the teachers and didn't involve our AART at all.

In our case, when we reapplied for level IV this year (3rd grade) she got in without issue. Massive change in her HOPE score and the teacher work samples were miles better (and more of them) than last year. She did already have high scores on the intelligence tests. The difference in teacher packets was kind of astounding. Evidence that having a teacher who "gets" your kid makes all the difference.

I definitely know her teacher didn't get her. But I guess i wasn't surprised she didn't get in because I saw her test scores as compared to the kids who did get in (from this page). So frustrating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So our daughter did not get into AAP, and after looking at the scores posted on this page, I totally understand why.

With that said, they just did subject-specific screening for all four and she did not get into any (I presumed no math, but thought she'd be competitive for the other 3).

Given there is no iReady or standardized assessment for SS/science, I am unclear how they reached their determination. The AAP lady said it was "We use work samples, HOPE scale, ability scores. Specifically, we look at if a student shows exceptional talent beyond their same age peers."

Literally every assessment that has ever come home this year for SS/science she has "scored" 100%. Her HOPE score was high, based on my understanding. And I keep asking how they determine "exceptional talent" and she's not responding.

(I also think her iReady/other scores should qualify her for reading/phonics, but at least I can see that those are objective data points and can be easily compared so I dont think i'll fight it).

Thoughts? This is our first year (2nd grade) going through this and I really feel like my daughter should have the chance.

Thank you.

I don't know what subject specific screening you are talking about. Our ES offered LII for math and LA only, there was nothing for science or social studies.

As for how they might screen, my kid was in AAP with the GBRSs. I saw the write up they did for him in each of the categories. The teachers were making comments about how he was reading books in free time about areas they were studying that he was interested in. They mentioned how he would bring in examples of knowledge he had from home (museums, shows he watched with us, books we read at home). He had high scores in his schoolwork but their examples showed how he had moved beyond the in class work and incorporated things he had learned in other places. Maybe your daughter is doing great in the classroom but is not taking that extra step?

I had a quiet kid who had to be persuaded to answer questions, the teachers were commenting on their observations and what they got from him with some gentle hudging.

We were advised by our AART that they screen for four subjects - math, literacy, science and social studies. I'm baffled by the notion that this is different school by school. Wow.

The difference is between the old level II (math or reading only) and level III (all 4 core subjects). But everything in FCPS is different school by school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So our daughter did not get into AAP, and after looking at the scores posted on this page, I totally understand why.

With that said, they just did subject-specific screening for all four and she did not get into any (I presumed no math, but thought she'd be competitive for the other 3).

Given there is no iReady or standardized assessment for SS/science, I am unclear how they reached their determination. The AAP lady said it was "We use work samples, HOPE scale, ability scores. Specifically, we look at if a student shows exceptional talent beyond their same age peers."

Literally every assessment that has ever come home this year for SS/science she has "scored" 100%. Her HOPE score was high, based on my understanding. And I keep asking how they determine "exceptional talent" and she's not responding.

(I also think her iReady/other scores should qualify her for reading/phonics, but at least I can see that those are objective data points and can be easily compared so I dont think i'll fight it).

Thoughts? This is our first year (2nd grade) going through this and I really feel like my daughter should have the chance.

Thank you.

I don't know what subject specific screening you are talking about. Our ES offered LII for math and LA only, there was nothing for science or social studies.

As for how they might screen, my kid was in AAP with the GBRSs. I saw the write up they did for him in each of the categories. The teachers were making comments about how he was reading books in free time about areas they were studying that he was interested in. They mentioned how he would bring in examples of knowledge he had from home (museums, shows he watched with us, books we read at home). He had high scores in his schoolwork but their examples showed how he had moved beyond the in class work and incorporated things he had learned in other places. Maybe your daughter is doing great in the classroom but is not taking that extra step?

I had a quiet kid who had to be persuaded to answer questions, the teachers were commenting on their observations and what they got from him with some gentle hudging.

We were advised by our AART that they screen for four subjects - math, literacy, science and social studies. I'm baffled by the notion that this is different school by school. Wow.

I know of no one who had LII in science or social studies. I knew some others had been accepted for LII, because parents were asking what it meant at the end of the year class party we were helping with in 2nd grade, but everyone that was discussing it was talking about math and LA. Maybe they did have something for social studies and science but I don't of anyone who received those services. That doesn't mean it didn't happen, but I would be surprised if it did and we didn't know kids who received those services.