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

[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.

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.

There is a field on the summary page that says "AAP Status Code_________." I believe this is where the LII services would be mentioned.

I would include any testing from this year or the prior school (if not superseded by something more recent) if you have to appeal. And you may not have to appeal, who knows?

I reason I said the HOPE is good but not outstanding is based on my limited "sample" of what was posted here last year plus my own kid. Whether or not that has any bearing on this year is unclear; it is subjective and it could depend more on the person filling it out than your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

There is a field on the summary page that says "AAP Status Code_________." I believe this is where the LII services would be mentioned.

I would include any testing from this year or the prior school (if not superseded by something more recent) if you have to appeal. And you may not have to appeal, who knows?

I reason I said the HOPE is good but not outstanding is based on my limited "sample" of what was posted here last year plus my own kid. Whether or not that has any bearing on this year is unclear; it is subjective and it could depend more on the person filling it out than your kid.

Thank you. My understanding is that the code just indicates that they have services in at least one subject. (The code is '2', fwiw.)

If I have to appeal (I expect I will), I will explicitly note the LII services in math AND LA and will mention I-Ready from previous school since it was not included. The AART said only fall scores included and DC was not in FCPS in fall of 1st grade.

I might need to swap out some of the work samples we submitted to more explicitly target the creative thinking strategies.