GT/Selected kids

[Anonymous]

I was not surprised at the kids at our orientation. There were a few I expected that were not present, but as PP said, not everyone goes to the orientation.

OP- don't forget, some of those peers may have ended up appealing and getting in after all. Those appeal letters don't get sent til June.

[Anonymous]

I heard some schools are keeping their good students in their school by giving them poor GBRS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This was not the case with us at all. I, too, volunteer a lot and every kid I expected to get in did. We are lucky because they are all DC closest friends. One teacher told me that there are a few surprises each year; kids you think will get in don't and kids who you think won't- do. It really comes down to the test. It has an arbitrary cut-off so like this year it was 130. If your DC's peer group all got 128's they would not make it in the pool unless the parent refers. However, if this is your 1st child you have no idea about all of this as they don't spell it out and most people have no idea what those scores that come in the mail in Jan are for (unless it comes with the "in pool letter") So, I guess what I am saying is that a lot of equally qualified kids get left out because they probably missed ONE question to not get the 130 and that is really a shame because it means absolutely nothing (those two points) but they have to have a cut-off somewhere I guess. It is a crazy process but the only one they have; I really do not think they hold back intentionally.

this post contains so much factual misinformtion it is hard to be taken seriously. Many many kids below 130 CogAt get in. Have you read this board for long? Some get in with 115 and lower.

[Anonymous]

Im not on any committee to choose who gets in and who doesnt but we did just have our DD get selected for AAP. My guess is what seems mostly overlooked on this board is whether or not the parents of kids who were automatically in the pool submitted the extra work samples and filled out the questionaire. The selection committee probably puts a lot of weight on this with the mindset that the parents are committed are cared enough about it to take the time to put the package together. Yes its optional but those who dont are directly competing with those who did and it does say a lot. So if your child gets good grades and did well on the tests but did not get in, you should not necessarily point the finger at the school or the process but at yourselves.

[Anonymous]

Respectfully disagree. Psychologist with 20+ years of experience with gifted in Fairfax County told me that the committee does not even read the stuff submitted by the parents, and that it is a complete numbers game of test scores, GBRS, and grades. The parent info just makes the parents feel like they are participating somehow. I was quite amazed, as I spent hours putting together a beautiful package of Parent Questionnaire, work samples, and letters of recommendation.

[Anonymous]

It is GBRS what matters most. My DS got 152 NNAT, 126 Cogat. GBRS 10. Submitted letters of recommendation, work samples, Certificates. All O's in progress report. Rejected.. Tell me the reason?. I think it is GBRS what made the difference.

[Anonymous]

Sorry that your child did not get it. It seems to be common knowledge that a high NNAT or high score on the nonverbal component of the CogAT are less persuasive with the committee than a high verbal score on the CogAT. You should consider the WISC and hope that your child scores higher on the VCI subtest. That would make up for the GBRS of 10. Best of luck.

[Anonymous]

We were also told that all the extra samples and stuff that parents submit are rarely, if ever, looked at. Basically, the test scores get you looked at and high gbrs secure your spot. If you end up in the "maybe" pile, the committee reads the comment page that accompanies the gbrs page. There is no formal directive that they have to consider all the other info, although they certainly can at their discretion. But if you think about how many kids' files they have to look at and the time they have to slog through them, it's not surprising that they don't have time to look at everything.
You really have to have compelling 'new' info for them to consider as they are not supposed to reconsider anything that has previously been submitted and deemed unexceptional. Awesome wisc scores are really the best choice for most people.

[Anonymous]

That's interesting. I hadn't heard the process explained in such detail. May I ask who told you that this is how they approach the files? I had heard that each file on appeal gets a more thorough review (simply because there are only a fraction of the total number to look over). I'd be interested to know the source of your info. I'm pretty low about knowing that six committe members considered my DD unexceptional (we have a WISC 130 on appeal).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry that your child did not get it. It seems to be common knowledge that a high NNAT or high score on the nonverbal component of the CogAT are less persuasive with the committee than a high verbal score on the CogAT. You should consider the WISC and hope that your child scores higher on the VCI subtest. That would make up for the GBRS of 10. Best of luck.

Interesting...my dc got NNAT 140, Cogat (NV) 135, no idea about GBRS, and was accepted into AAP.

[Anonymous]

May I ask what were the CogAT quantitative and verbal scores, as well as composite? Thanks.

[Anonymous]

PP,

Cogat quantitative and verbal in the 120s

[Anonymous]

I've read around the boards they are not looking for well-rounded kids like a college entrance, but rather kids who need in a sense "special ed"--kids who's needs are not being met at their base school and show a giftedness in some capacity. Being highly verbal is just one way a child may show giftedness.

For example, High scorers in perceptual reasoning ability for example are more apt to do well in engineering, architecture, art. But, these kids may not be your authors of the future.

[Anonymous]

No one said anyone's child is unexceptional....just that their 'stats' were unexceptional. The goal of the central screening committee is to identify children, based on a county wide testing program and classroom behavior scale, that are deemed most likely to benefit from a different learning environment. It's not full proof, and I'm sure some kids fall through the cracks... But really, they are supposed to be looking at the numbers and making determinations - with the numbers being test scores and gbrs. Not every child is meant for this particular program, although based on some of these threads, parents will do just about anything to get their kids in - whether they really belong in that environment or not. The committee members are dedicated sand experienced educators who are doing the best they can with these selections.

[Anonymous]

They should adopt the process in place in Denmark, and keep all the kids together in mixed-ability classes until age 10, to avoid the "outlier" effect. That is the real reason parents fight so hard to get their kids in GT at age 7-8, because by being put in GT, even merely "bright" children start to perform as well as the truly "gifted" children (and all the gen. ed. kids get left in the dust).