AAP - What was the 2021-22 pool cut-off for your school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Our AART said the cutoff was going to be for the entire county, not school-by-school.

My AART said the opposite in the level IV meeting this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Our AART said the cutoff was going to be for the entire county, not school-by-school.

Brabrand disagrees:

ast year, FCPS piloted the use of local building norms to
create the second-grade screening pool in schools that already had level IV services available (105
schools). The pilot found that this methodology positively impacted the number of Black & Hispanic
students and number of students in Title 1 schools who were included in the screening process,
while not disadvantaging other students. Therefore, in SY 2021-22, the use of local building norms
to create the 2nd grade screening pool will be expanded to all FCPS elementary schools.

(https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/C7WNMJ5CD260/$file/Brabrand%20Briefing%20-%20October%2018%2C%202021.pdf - bolding mine)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Our AART said the cutoff was going to be for the entire county, not school-by-school.

Brabrand disagrees:

ast year, FCPS piloted the use of local building norms to
create the second-grade screening pool in schools that already had level IV services available (105
schools). The pilot found that this methodology positively impacted the number of Black & Hispanic
students and number of students in Title 1 schools who were included in the screening process,
while not disadvantaging other students. Therefore, in SY 2021-22, the use of local building norms
to create the 2nd grade screening pool will be expanded to all FCPS elementary schools.

(https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/C7WNMJ5CD260/$file/Brabrand%20Briefing%20-%20October%2018%2C%202021.pdf - bolding mine)

Well, the GFES AART can jump in a lake. She specifically informed us earlier this fall that it would be for the entire county.

Why do school employees give out misinformation? Do they think it is funny?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Our AART said the cutoff was going to be for the entire county, not school-by-school.

Brabrand disagrees:

ast year, FCPS piloted the use of local building norms to
create the second-grade screening pool in schools that already had level IV services available (105
schools). The pilot found that this methodology positively impacted the number of Black & Hispanic
students and number of students in Title 1 schools who were included in the screening process,
while not disadvantaging other students. Therefore, in SY 2021-22, the use of local building norms
to create the 2nd grade screening pool will be expanded to all FCPS elementary schools.

(https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/C7WNMJ5CD260/$file/Brabrand%20Briefing%20-%20October%2018%2C%202021.pdf - bolding mine)

Well, the GFES AART can jump in a lake. She specifically informed us earlier this fall that it would be for the entire county.

Why do school employees give out misinformation? Do they think it is funny?

NP. She may have been confused (there's a lot of confusion about this new admissions system) or may have misspoken or you may have misheard.

But your first guess is that she's deliberately giving you false information as a joke...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But then I would imagine that the AART would have said there is no pool for 3rd graders not 138 is not in pool unless the person misunderstood.

Exactly, they misunderstood. They may have gotten the score from the AART in one sentence. Then a few sentences later they may have learned that they still need to parent refer because their kid is not in pool. Everyone is jumping to conclusions on here because a third grade parent says their kid's 138 isn't in pool. It's ridiculous.

I wish this forum had actual logins with usernames. You could still be anonymous, but at least that way people could look at your post history to see if you were a brand new account or one posting fake stuff constantly just to troll people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Our AART said the cutoff was going to be for the entire county, not school-by-school.

Brabrand disagrees:

ast year, FCPS piloted the use of local building norms to
create the second-grade screening pool in schools that already had level IV services available (105
schools). The pilot found that this methodology positively impacted the number of Black & Hispanic
students and number of students in Title 1 schools who were included in the screening process,
while not disadvantaging other students. Therefore, in SY 2021-22, the use of local building norms
to create the 2nd grade screening pool will be expanded to all FCPS elementary schools.

(https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/C7WNMJ5CD260/$file/Brabrand%20Briefing%20-%20October%2018%2C%202021.pdf - bolding mine)

If she told you before 10/18 it may not have been decided. They are utterly winging admissions. They were last year too (decided local building norm pilot on 12/2 last year).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But then I would imagine that the AART would have said there is no pool for 3rd graders not 138 is not in pool unless the person misunderstood.

Exactly, they misunderstood. They may have gotten the score from the AART in one sentence. Then a few sentences later they may have learned that they still need to parent refer because their kid is not in pool. Everyone is jumping to conclusions on here because a third grade parent says their kid's 138 isn't in pool. It's ridiculous.

I wish this forum had actual logins with usernames. You could still be anonymous, but at least that way people could look at your post history to see if you were a brand new account or one posting fake stuff constantly just to troll people.

This is the actual post from that poster. It really doesn't sound like misunderstanding, but you're welcome to ask on that thread the grade of the kid:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We got ours today in my daughter’s backpack. We are Oakton Pyramid. She scored a 138 composite but we didn’t get an in pool email. Could the cut off this year been higher than 132?

The most likely scenario is that Gatehouse has an incorrect or outdated email address, or the email was delivered to your spam folder.

So far 2 people claim that they had a score over 132 and were not notified of being in-pool.

I confirmed with our AART person and 138 (despite being 99th percentile) was not in pool this year. Apparently the pool is smaller than past years.

[Anonymous]

I heard 140 cut off, likely to minimIze number of kids in aap as all schools transition to level 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I heard 140 cut off, likely to minimIze number of kids in aap as all schools transition to level 4

Are you pulling this 100% out of the air or do you have a school name to go with this? There's not a 140 cut-off county-wide, that's for sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I heard 140 cut off, likely to minimIze number of kids in aap as all schools transition to level 4

They're not trying to minimize the total number of kids in AAP, they're trying to improve equity by upping the number of in-pool kids from Title I schools. An increase in the number of in-pool kids from Title I schools, means a similar decrease in the number of in-pool candidates from higher-performing schools. It doesn't mean those who aren't in-pool won't still be admitted, it just means they'll have to parent-refer and fill out all the forms (which they probably would have done anyway).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard 140 cut off, likely to minimIze number of kids in aap as all schools transition to level 4

They're not trying to minimize the total number of kids in AAP, they're trying to improve equity by upping the number of in-pool kids from Title I schools. An increase in the number of in-pool kids from Title I schools, means a similar decrease in the number of in-pool candidates from higher-performing schools. It doesn't mean those who aren't in-pool won't still be admitted, it just means they'll have to parent-refer and fill out all the forms (which they probably would have done anyway).

While I think PP is BS-ing, there is a point that the eventual transition to all local level IVs which has been in the plan for 2 years will require some schools to have fewer kids in level IV or drastically change the way the school is structured.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Our AART said the cutoff was going to be for the entire county, not school-by-school.

Brabrand disagrees:

ast year, FCPS piloted the use of local building norms to
create the second-grade screening pool in schools that already had level IV services available (105
schools). The pilot found that this methodology positively impacted the number of Black & Hispanic
students and number of students in Title 1 schools who were included in the screening process,
while not disadvantaging other students. Therefore, in SY 2021-22, the use of local building norms
to create the 2nd grade screening pool will be expanded to all FCPS elementary schools.

(https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/C7WNMJ5CD260/$file/Brabrand%20Briefing%20-%20October%2018%2C%202021.pdf - bolding mine)

If she told you before 10/18 it may not have been decided. They are utterly winging admissions. They were last year too (decided local building norm pilot on 12/2 last year).

Exactly! At our first AAP meeting, AART told us it’s going to be around 132 county wide. At 2nd meeting, she told us there’s a change to use building norms and she doesn’t know what’s going to be.

[Anonymous]

If they are transitioning to all Local Level IV, and everything seems to be pointing that way, then I can see local levels being set to try and limit the number of LLIV classrooms to a set number of classes, probably between 1-2 dependent on the size of the school. So if you are at a high SES school and limiting the AAP LLIV to 2 classrooms, you end up with a CogAT cut off in the 140's while a similar size Title I school will probably end up with a 120. You would end up with the same number of kids in each of the LLIV but the bar for admission is normed based on the schools scores.

But that is a hypothetical situation at the moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they are transitioning to all Local Level IV, and everything seems to be pointing that way, then I can see local levels being set to try and limit the number of LLIV classrooms to a set number of classes, probably between 1-2 dependent on the size of the school. So if you are at a high SES school and limiting the AAP LLIV to 2 classrooms, you end up with a CogAT cut off in the 140's while a similar size Title I school will probably end up with a 120. You would end up with the same number of kids in each of the LLIV but the bar for admission is normed based on the schools scores.

But that is a hypothetical situation at the moment.

But the local building norms situation is not. It's real.

And how they determined the norms is a black box right now. That doesn't seem fair to families.

[Anonymous]

I'm sure it's probably a percentile. Top 5-10% of scorers at each school. My guess is the top 5, given what appears to be a cut-off of 140ish at some schools.