132 Composite-- CogAT
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I was just told it's the second time by our AART. |
Anonymous
So is the in pool benchmark based on the local score, the grade score or the age adjusted score? Sorry if this is a dumb question, but I haven't received DC's scores yet so I don't have scores explaining how it works. |
Anonymous
We received scores -- 141 for quantitative, 134 for nonverbal, and 98  for verbal. Child's NNAT was few points below what is needed to be in the pool as well. I am a bit concerned about such a large gap between quantitative and verbal though...
Do you think I should still parent-refer to keep our options open and get WISC or would you just drop it here? |
Anonymous
I think your child is in. the NNAT is a less reliable test. |
Anonymous
I would get a WISC. Kids are often stronger in one area than another, but that's more than 2 standard deviations difference. Could be that there was something about the verbal test that he/she didn't understand, or maybe he/she lost focus on a section. |
Anonymous
Not if they're smart enough that they should be in the program. Plenty of kids with August birthdays scoring well over the threshhold. |
Anonymous
My DC is similar as well, 131 on NNAT and high score on 2 of the 3 CogAT with verbal being pretty low. It was surprising actually. Question about Age based results, does anyone know if the age is based on birthday or is the age for the whole grade. DC's sheet says "compared to 8 yr olds" and DC is in 2nd grade, early Oct birthday. I'm confused how the age is determined. |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
My child received similar scores. I found this shocking because he usually does very well with verbal and he is a voracious reader. Either he had a bad day or he simply did not understand the questions. One of his friends, who is in the same class, had the same issue. His friend did great in quantitative and nonverbal, but he performed poorly in verbal. I am beginning to question if the school helped prepare the kids for this section at all. I am still referring my son because I feel he would be a good fit for the program. |
Anonymous
|
The reason to use 132 composite is to reduce the workload for the process. There are kids that can score high on one subtest, so they are in pool. I know a kid that scored 135 quant, 94 Verb 101 non-verbal, and that year was in pool. Composite was something like 114. He was not admitted.
By comparison, my DD had (Q/NV/V/Comp) of 119/121/123/124. Which is the stronger score? (My DD had a 14 GBRS, and was admitted, but this was in 2010; YMMV). |
Anonymous
| My ds's scores are V, Q, N, Comp, 120, 123, 119, 123, he is not in pool, but his bday in June, is he younger in the group or not? |
Anonymous
If you feel the verbal scores are not indicative of your kid's ability, and your kid is able to handle the higher-level writing, in particular, in AAP, you should seek a WISC and refer. But if your kid is primarily strong in math, know that he or she can still do advanced math even if he is not in AAP. At our LLIV school, several non-level 4 kids take math with the AAP kids. |
Anonymous
Correcting my previous response (above) --- I read your post as saying your child had 98% for verbal, not an actual score of 98! Oops--- my reading comprehension is obviously not advanced! I do not think your child will get in with those scores. Either your child was out to lunch for the verbal test or his/her comprehension is lower than you realize. The AAP program is more "verbal" than you might realize. If that is a true reflection of your child's reading comprehension, it would be a disservice to put him/her in the AAP program. You will be frustrated and your child will be frustrated. |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
| Where do I find information as to what the cutoff scores are? |