Appeal Suggestions for Borderline Daughter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am curious why you would push her into a program for which she's not qualified to participate? Why not err on the other side of the border?

NP. Why would you view her as unqualified? The CogAT scores are off the charts and well above the 99.9th percentile threshold. The HOPE rating is quite strong. While the iready scores are not great, there are a lot of kids with lower scores getting admitted. OP's kid should have been a shoo-in and not borderline, based on the CogAT and HOPE.

The person who thinks that the CogAT looks prepped is a moron. It would not be possible to prep a kid to a 150 CogAT, unless the kid would have scored in the 99th percentile without prep. Also, prepped kids are much more likely to be in math and reading enrichment programs, and thus have high iready scores, but lower HOPE ratings.

OP, either the work samples were bad/sloppy, the iready scores gave the panel some concern, or your child was a victim of the randomness of the system. The same approach should cover all three. Write a parent letter emphasizing your kid's gifted traits, showing that your child is academically advanced in both language arts and reading, and explaining why your child needs the extra challenge of AAP. Include work samples that show advanced abilities in both math and language arts. Put an explanation of the gifted trait being shown by the sample either in a box on the sample itself, or reference it in your cover letter.

A kid with a 150 CogAT and reasonably strong support from the teacher obviously belongs in AAP.

Disagree. 150 COGAT should be tied with 99% on iready, and a much higher NNAT; these arent all independant elements - If a child is that bright, it manifests itself across the board. Of everything presented, the COGAT is the outlier. There is a HUUUUGE difference between 99% (136 COGAT) and their score of 150. If they presented the same information with a COGAT of 136, which is likely the unprepped score of the child, then we'd all be in agreement that the child is likely a high-borderline candidate, even then though, the low 90's iready are odd without an explanation (sick, back from travel, ??)

I did notice we basically arrived at the same solution. Appeal, emphasize needing challenges, and show work samples in language arts (potentially math).

The elements actually are somewhat independent. CogAT is an aptitude test and should measure intrinsic ability. iready is an achievement test and measures level of academic advancement. They're not the same, and there are many reasons why a kid might be much higher on the one than the other. A kid who has higher intrinsic ability but lower achievement would fit the profile of a kid who has not received much outside or home enrichment, has an undiagnosed LD (ADHD, dyslexia, etc.), or who rushed through the iready.

Also, the OP's HOPE score is a pretty strong endorsement. If the kid has a 99th percentile CogAT (even if it's a 'mere' 136) and has relatively strong teacher support, I wouldn't view the kid as borderline.

At this point, I'm not going to regurgitate my opinion so that you can do the same with yours. Disagree on your analysis/points, though we both agree the child should more than likely be in than not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am curious why you would push her into a program for which she's not qualified to participate? Why not err on the other side of the border?

NP. Why would you view her as unqualified? The CogAT scores are off the charts and well above the 99.9th percentile threshold. The HOPE rating is quite strong. While the iready scores are not great, there are a lot of kids with lower scores getting admitted. OP's kid should have been a shoo-in and not borderline, based on the CogAT and HOPE.

The person who thinks that the CogAT looks prepped is a moron. It would not be possible to prep a kid to a 150 CogAT, unless the kid would have scored in the 99th percentile without prep. Also, prepped kids are much more likely to be in math and reading enrichment programs, and thus have high iready scores, but lower HOPE ratings.

OP, either the work samples were bad/sloppy, the iready scores gave the panel some concern, or your child was a victim of the randomness of the system. The same approach should cover all three. Write a parent letter emphasizing your kid's gifted traits, showing that your child is academically advanced in both language arts and reading, and explaining why your child needs the extra challenge of AAP. Include work samples that show advanced abilities in both math and language arts. Put an explanation of the gifted trait being shown by the sample either in a box on the sample itself, or reference it in your cover letter.

A kid with a 150 CogAT and reasonably strong support from the teacher obviously belongs in AAP.

Disagree. 150 COGAT should be tied with 99% on iready, and a much higher NNAT; these arent all independant elements - If a child is that bright, it manifests itself across the board. Of everything presented, the COGAT is the outlier. There is a HUUUUGE difference between 99% (136 COGAT) and their score of 150. If they presented the same information with a COGAT of 136, which is likely the unprepped score of the child, then we'd all be in agreement that the child is likely a high-borderline candidate, even then though, the low 90's iready are odd without an explanation (sick, back from travel, ??)

I did notice we basically arrived at the same solution. Appeal, emphasize needing challenges, and show work samples in language arts (potentially math).

The elements actually are somewhat independent. CogAT is an aptitude test and should measure intrinsic ability. iready is an achievement test and measures level of academic advancement. They're not the same, and there are many reasons why a kid might be much higher on the one than the other. A kid who has higher intrinsic ability but lower achievement would fit the profile of a kid who has not received much outside or home enrichment, has an undiagnosed LD (ADHD, dyslexia, etc.), or who rushed through the iready.

Also, the OP's HOPE score is a pretty strong endorsement. If the kid has a 99th percentile CogAT (even if it's a 'mere' 136) and has relatively strong teacher support, I wouldn't view the kid as borderline.

Agree with this:"A kid who has higher intrinsic ability but lower achievement would fit the profile of a kid who has not received much outside or home enrichment, has an undiagnosed LD (ADHD, dyslexia, etc.), or who rushed through the iready. "

But unfortunately, FCPS seems viewing it differently, high CogAT, lower iReady, the student must have prepped for CogAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am curious why you would push her into a program for which she's not qualified to participate? Why not err on the other side of the border?

NP. Why would you view her as unqualified? The CogAT scores are off the charts and well above the 99.9th percentile threshold. The HOPE rating is quite strong. While the iready scores are not great, there are a lot of kids with lower scores getting admitted. OP's kid should have been a shoo-in and not borderline, based on the CogAT and HOPE.

The person who thinks that the CogAT looks prepped is a moron. It would not be possible to prep a kid to a 150 CogAT, unless the kid would have scored in the 99th percentile without prep. Also, prepped kids are much more likely to be in math and reading enrichment programs, and thus have high iready scores, but lower HOPE ratings.

OP, either the work samples were bad/sloppy, the iready scores gave the panel some concern, or your child was a victim of the randomness of the system. The same approach should cover all three. Write a parent letter emphasizing your kid's gifted traits, showing that your child is academically advanced in both language arts and reading, and explaining why your child needs the extra challenge of AAP. Include work samples that show advanced abilities in both math and language arts. Put an explanation of the gifted trait being shown by the sample either in a box on the sample itself, or reference it in your cover letter.

A kid with a 150 CogAT and reasonably strong support from the teacher obviously belongs in AAP.

Disagree. 150 COGAT should be tied with 99% on iready, and a much higher NNAT; these arent all independant elements - If a child is that bright, it manifests itself across the board. Of everything presented, the COGAT is the outlier. There is a HUUUUGE difference between 99% (136 COGAT) and their score of 150. If they presented the same information with a COGAT of 136, which is likely the unprepped score of the child, then we'd all be in agreement that the child is likely a high-borderline candidate, even then though, the low 90's iready are odd without an explanation (sick, back from travel, ??)

I did notice we basically arrived at the same solution. Appeal, emphasize needing challenges, and show work samples in language arts (potentially math).

The elements actually are somewhat independent. CogAT is an aptitude test and should measure intrinsic ability. iready is an achievement test and measures level of academic advancement. They're not the same, and there are many reasons why a kid might be much higher on the one than the other. A kid who has higher intrinsic ability but lower achievement would fit the profile of a kid who has not received much outside or home enrichment, has an undiagnosed LD (ADHD, dyslexia, etc.), or who rushed through the iready.

Also, the OP's HOPE score is a pretty strong endorsement. If the kid has a 99th percentile CogAT (even if it's a 'mere' 136) and has relatively strong teacher support, I wouldn't view the kid as borderline.

Agree with this:"A kid who has higher intrinsic ability but lower achievement would fit the profile of a kid who has not received much outside or home enrichment, has an undiagnosed LD (ADHD, dyslexia, etc.), or who rushed through the iready. "

But unfortunately, FCPS seems viewing it differently, high CogAT, lower iReady, the student must have prepped for CogAT.

I really don't think FCPS cares nearly as much about CogAT prepping as people on this board think they do. They cared the year kids got the actual answers to the actual test, sure. But other than that I don't think they spend all their committee time saying "This kid looks prepped! That kid doesn't!" I think they spend their time saying "This matches the profile we were trained on of a kid who needs AAP."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe my child is on the borderline:

Cogat:150
NNAT：127
iReady Math: 90
iReady Reading: 85
Hope: 1 Always / 7 Almost Always / 3 Often

Note - She is a summer born so is naturally one of the youngest in the class.

What should we focus on in our appeal?

Did you submit an original package, or were you in-pool? What did your parent and school samples look like?

The COGAT looks really out of place with the rest of the info, though the teacher seems to like her. I'd focus on why my daughter needs services and copy a lot of the language from FCPS's website. If you have the COGAT break-out scores to determine weaknesses, you can tie your work samples to the smaller score.

Wishing you the best of luck!

[Anonymous]

Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

This is what bothers me about the whole "holistic process" It favors families that are "in the know" about how the process works. You are intentionally giving an advantage to the children of parents that are familiar with the process.

[Anonymous]

Re COGAT vs IReady argument..... strong IReadies also show what a child has been capable of already picking up in the classroom.

High scores compared to others in grade= they're learning what they're being taught. There is no way to "prep" for the IReady other than simply reading books and learning math.

A child who is already learning faster than others in many ways is the quintessential case for AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

This is what bothers me about the whole "holistic process" It favors families that are "in the know" about how the process works. You are intentionally giving an advantage to the children of parents that are familiar with the process.

Every parent has access to the AART and above is what would be told. It’s not being in the know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

How long were your samples when submitted? 1 page for each sample and 1 page for parent statement so 5 pages total or did you do something else? What are page limits for appeals. Thanks,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
How long were your samples when submitted? 1 page for each sample and 1 page for parent statement so 5 pages total or did you do something else? What are page limits for appeals. Thanks,

1 page for each sample, which included the work (photo of it) plus a few sentences describing the sample at the bottom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

Since no-one else has said it - Thank you for the update - Congratulations to your daughter! Super glad it worked out for you all - It sounds like that's where she needs to be!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

Since no-one else has said it - Thank you for the update - Congratulations to your daughter! Super glad it worked out for you all - It sounds like that's where she needs to be!

Thank you! At the end of the day we truly think she deserves it in terms of her performance and aptitude - I think that is what ultimately matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

This is what bothers me about the whole "holistic process" It favors families that are "in the know" about how the process works. You are intentionally giving an advantage to the children of parents that are familiar with the process.

Every parent has access to the AART and above is what would be told. It’s not being in the know.

Then why are some people finding out this information here?

Having access to AART is meaningless to a family that doesn't know they should be reaching out to their AART.

Why isn't the AART reaching out to the families?

[Anonymous]

Not all AARTs are helpful. Ours won't schedule meetings to talk about appeals. We see her once at the AAP presentation where she doesn't really answer questions, and then she answers emails with one sentence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe my child is on the borderline:

Cogat:150
NNAT：127
iReady Math: 90
iReady Reading: 85
Hope: 1 Always / 7 Almost Always / 3 Often

Note - She is a summer born so is naturally one of the youngest in the class.

What should we focus on in our appeal?

COGAT looks prepped based on the other scores. Emphasize the reading/writing areas, since that one is lower, but likely still need to cover math as well - this might depend on the sub-scores in COGAT. Focus on why your child needs services. My package was geared towards how my child thrives on competition, and needed appropriate role models in class at his/her level. Give some examples of where they excelled in a higher level environment, or how they struggled without that environment. Don't say they're bored.

I think this is it. My kids are older but both had CogAT scores in the low to mid-140's (unprepped). Their NNAT scores were similar, though a little lower, and they always got 98th/99th percentile on iReady and older one maxed out DRA for his age when that was still a thing. Both also had perfect GBRS (16 for older, 4 CO for younger). They both were found eligible first round.