NGAT for 26-27

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yeah, so my guess would be that it will now be based on parent referral, HOPE and samples from teachers. There will be even more variability in the admission process next year. I am guessing this is a move to make it more inclusive.

There's still MAP and VALLS, but I don't see how removing data points would make the process more inclusive.

Without NGAT or COGAT, more parents would be incentivized to get a WISC. If they disallow for consideration of WISC scores, it would disadvantage 2E kids who are more likely, when younger, to have difficulty consistently producing work samples that reflect their cognitive abilities (and thus also affect their HOPE scores). Either way, the result is not more inclusive.

Exactly, this is a chance for English learners to be spotted, for 2E kids, kids whose parents are for any reason not pushing for this. Seems like a critical piece.

[Anonymous]

Maybe they want parents to pay for testing to save money. If parents are interested in the program they can provide private test results?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they want parents to pay for testing to save money. If parents are interested in the program they can provide private test results?

But equity!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they want parents to pay for testing to save money. If parents are interested in the program they can provide private test results?

But equity!

They will say it’s optional.

[Anonymous]

Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.

Wow so with VALLS being irrelevant to AAP since the focus is to diagnose problems, all is left is MAP fall and HOPE?!

[Anonymous]

I don’t know why they keep reinventing the wheel on admissions. It signals that they have absolutely no idea what they’re doing.

[Anonymous]

Yes, not clear why they are doing that. We would not know for sure till the FCPS website is updated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.

Wow so with VALLS being irrelevant to AAP since the focus is to diagnose problems, all is left is MAP fall and HOPE?!

VALLS was included in last years packet (DC is a current AAP 3rd grader) so I wouldn’t say it’s irrelevant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.

Wow so with VALLS being irrelevant to AAP since the focus is to diagnose problems, all is left is MAP fall and HOPE?!

VALLS was included in last years packet (DC is a current AAP 3rd grader) so I wouldn’t say it’s irrelevant

Dp, not irrelevant, but limited. A kid with a so-so score will likely be hurt by VALLS, but there are probably many kids with good scores that a good score doesn't reveal much.

The test wasn't intended to determine how well a kid reads, and so once a kid can read, they'll score well. There's little info about how well a kid reads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.

Wow so with VALLS being irrelevant to AAP since the focus is to diagnose problems, all is left is MAP fall and HOPE?!

VALLS was included in last years packet (DC is a current AAP 3rd grader) so I wouldn’t say it’s irrelevant

Dp, not irrelevant, but limited. A kid with a so-so score will likely be hurt by VALLS, but there are probably many kids with good scores that a good score doesn't reveal much.

The test wasn't intended to determine how well a kid reads, and so once a kid can read, they'll score well. There's little info about how well a kid reads.

What's a so-so score?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.

Wow so with VALLS being irrelevant to AAP since the focus is to diagnose problems, all is left is MAP fall and HOPE?!

VALLS was included in last years packet (DC is a current AAP 3rd grader) so I wouldn’t say it’s irrelevant

Dp, not irrelevant, but limited. A kid with a so-so score will likely be hurt by VALLS, but there are probably many kids with good scores that a good score doesn't reveal much.

The test wasn't intended to determine how well a kid reads, and so once a kid can read, they'll score well. There's little info about how well a kid reads.

What's a so-so score?

Sometimes people post VALLS on the AAP decisions or appeals threads, which is why I think there is a cutoff, but not enough people post to see a clear trend line.

If we collectively started to record VALLS on threads like those, we could probably sus out a number that is at least in the ballpark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I am hearing from the class teachers that there will be no testing other than MAP and VALLs next year for second graders.

Wow so with VALLS being irrelevant to AAP since the focus is to diagnose problems, all is left is MAP fall and HOPE?!

VALLS was included in last years packet (DC is a current AAP 3rd grader) so I wouldn’t say it’s irrelevant

Dp, not irrelevant, but limited. A kid with a so-so score will likely be hurt by VALLS, but there are probably many kids with good scores that a good score doesn't reveal much.

The test wasn't intended to determine how well a kid reads, and so once a kid can read, they'll score well. There's little info about how well a kid reads.

What's a so-so score?

Sometimes people post VALLS on the AAP decisions or appeals threads, which is why I think there is a cutoff, but not enough people post to see a clear trend line.

If we collectively started to record VALLS on threads like those, we could probably sus out a number that is at least in the ballpark.

Do they see scores of the individual sections? Oral reading fluency section probably gives more information about ability than any other individual section and can be converted to a national percentile I believe. Also, the max score seems to vary based on how many subsections they do. I dont think you can reasonably compare scores unless all the subtests and max score are the same.

[Anonymous]

It just does not make sense to have no other testing. Is anybody else hearing this?

[Anonymous]

Any update here?