Arlington's gifted identification rate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is an IQ scale for gifted and genius, idiots

Neither APS nor FCPS use IQ tests for admission to their gifted programs.

Lines up with IQ

The average score for the test is 100, and any score from 90 to 109 is considered to be in the average intelligence range. Score from 110 to 119 are considered to be High Average. Superior scores range from 120 to 129 and anything over 130 is considered Very Superior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is an IQ scale for gifted and genius, idiots

Neither APS nor FCPS use IQ tests for admission to their gifted programs.

Lines up with IQ

The average score for the test is 100, and any score from 90 to 109 is considered to be in the average intelligence range. Score from 110 to 119 are considered to be High Average. Superior scores range from 120 to 129 and anything over 130 is considered Very Superior.

Actually, it doesn't. The correlation between CogAT scores and IQ is very weak. The tests are even measuring different attributes. https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-correlation-between-CogAT-scores-and-IQ
On top of that, in this area there's so much prepping. It would be incorrect to assume that a child with a 130 CogAT has a 130 IQ.

[Anonymous]

I'm going to give an outsider's opinion (someone who used to live in DC area- this popped up on recent). If the kids in DC, Arllington, etc. are that smart, why don't you raise the IQ test bar above the current level?
Some areas have the IQ test at 125, some at 132- it all depends on what is considered gifted for a particular district. If 10% of your kids are at 132, improve your general education and take only the 135 and above for full time special programming like AAP and use pull out programs where they are needed in general education.
Gifted programming exists to fill a need, not a feather in the cap-- it shouldn't be better programming, it should be different because the *small* percentage of students who qualify should require an education that is different from the vast majority of their peers.
I know that no one wants to hear from someone who is not in your area- I read this forum sometimes because there is good information for my own DS. He is considered exceptionally gifted via an IQ test and I'm sure if I was still there I would push for whatever is considered the gold standard in public education too- but honestly, even he would do well with a heavily accelerated math class and more support with language arts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In my school, only the top 2% had gifted services/identification and there was a school wide cap of 12 or 14. I was tested at about 135 and didn't make it. The kids I knew who were in had 140+.

I was surprised that a simple ipad game was used for identification in APS and now I see what that gets us.

As a trained statistician, it's too high. On the other hand, this area has a strong selection bias towards the very bright.

The NNAT is only part of the equation. APS also uses work samples, gifted resource teacher evaluation and teacher recommendation.

I’m surprised at how worked up people get over use of the word “gifted.” Maybe APS should start using a different term for the services they provide that go above and beyond the basic curriculum.

Lots of kids, not just identified ones, benefit from more the more challenging work provided by the “gifted” resource teachers. It’s not an exclusive club or separate academic track for a reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The NNAT is only part of the equation. APS also uses work samples, gifted resource teacher evaluation and teacher recommendation.

I’m surprised at how worked up people get over use of the word “gifted.” Maybe APS should start using a different term for the services they provide that go above and beyond the basic curriculum.

Lots of kids, not just identified ones, benefit from more the more challenging work provided by the “gifted” resource teachers. It’s not an exclusive club or separate academic track for a reason.

It's a bit different in FCPS, because they're busing all of the "gifted" kids to separate schools and self-contained classrooms, when most of those kids could be served at their base schools. I don't know much about the gifted services in APS, but in FCPS, they only provide acceleration by 1 year. Many kids who are actually gifted and not just bright, high-achievers need more acceleration than the schools are currently providing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The NNAT is only part of the equation. APS also uses work samples, gifted resource teacher evaluation and teacher recommendation.

I’m surprised at how worked up people get over use of the word “gifted.” Maybe APS should start using a different term for the services they provide that go above and beyond the basic curriculum.

Lots of kids, not just identified ones, benefit from more the more challenging work provided by the “gifted” resource teachers. It’s not an exclusive club or separate academic track for a reason.

It's a bit different in FCPS, because they're busing all of the "gifted" kids to separate schools and self-contained classrooms, when most of those kids could be served at their base schools. I don't know much about the gifted services in APS, but in FCPS, they only provide acceleration by 1 year. Many kids who are actually gifted and not just bright, high-achievers need more acceleration than the schools are currently providing.

Wanted to add to this...
Part of the problem is that the State of Virginia mandates that gifted education be provided to gifted students. FCPS and APS get around actually providing gifted services to the truly gifted kids who need those services by using an overly broad definition of gifted, and then providing watered down gifted services to 20%+ of the kids. Within AAP, my gifted kid is somewhat served by being grade skipped in one subject and being allowed to self-enrich in the others. The teachers can't just speed up the class or provide deeper work, because so many of the AAP kids need the slower pace. A lot of people with gifted kids feel that the obvious solution is to send the kids who can't keep up with the pace in AAP back to gen ed, rather than slowing down AAP. If AAP only admitted kids who are gifted, the classes could move at a much faster, deeper pace, and the gifted kids could actually have their needs met.

[Anonymous]

Heater gonna hate

[Anonymous]

APS gifted program is a joke. The use of the word "gifted" is a shame. APS claims that identified kids get extensions of the work. Ha! We ended up moving out of APS for Fairfax. It is night and day. Best decision for my two kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my school, only the top 2% had gifted services/identification and there was a school wide cap of 12 or 14. I was tested at about 135 and didn't make it. The kids I knew who were in had 140+.

I was surprised that a simple ipad game was used for identification in APS and now I see what that gets us.

As a trained statistician, it's too high. On the other hand, this area has a strong selection bias towards the very bright.

What iPad game?

Like we'd tell you. There's enough gaming of the system already.

(Unclench -- that's a joke)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my school, only the top 2% had gifted services/identification and there was a school wide cap of 12 or 14. I was tested at about 135 and didn't make it. The kids I knew who were in had 140+.

I was surprised that a simple ipad game was used for identification in APS and now I see what that gets us.

As a trained statistician, it's too high. On the other hand, this area has a strong selection bias towards the very bright.

What iPad game?

Like we'd tell you. There's enough gaming of the system already.

(Unclench -- that's a joke)

The NNAT is an Ipad game IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my school, only the top 2% had gifted services/identification and there was a school wide cap of 12 or 14. I was tested at about 135 and didn't make it. The kids I knew who were in had 140+.

I was surprised that a simple ipad game was used for identification in APS and now I see what that gets us.

As a trained statistician, it's too high. On the other hand, this area has a strong selection bias towards the very bright.

What iPad game?

Like we'd tell you. There's enough gaming of the system already.

(Unclench -- that's a joke)

The NNAT is an Ipad game IMO.

It's on the iPad but it's a real test, not a game. So yeah, no.