Another perspective on “prepping” from a lower income mom

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guidance on retesting:

https://support.pearson.com/usclinical/s/article/Clinical-Customer-Support-Test-Retest-Minimum-Time-Advice

Note that prepping is not taking the test over and over to exhaust the bank of questions. Prepping is taking “like” tests based on the interpretation of a third party on what concepts and format are relevant.

Right. This applies to enrolling at testing sites that “prep” AND going through practice tests w/ parents to understand why the right answer is correct and learning to apply that concept to other similar questions. It’s not how their brain actually interprets the question to arrive at the answer un-coached. That’s what this test is intended to show.

So now you’re an expert on how brain interprets questions!

No, I have a basic understanding of how aptitude tests work, which quite a number of you are clearly lacking.

It’s very basic, that’s for sure!

Although you claim to know how brain interprets questions, the intent of the test, the retesting validity and so on. I’m wondering what your credentials are that make your expertise so relevant.

Prepping does increase the scores, some of it from being familiar with the format, some from actually having a better understanding of the concept through learning. None constitute cheating. Take for example sorting based on a characteristic, you seem to be fine if this is learned at home using legos, but it’s a big no-no if the student explores sorting through a paid third party service that may be designed to match typical wisc sorting questions.

You are free to cheat as much as your conscience allows. There's no honor system for the Cogat test. Which is why FCPS ignores high scores.

I don't plan to take a cogat test any time soon. Feel free to justify for yourself that any high score is the direct result of cheating, because, of course, that's the only way anyone can score higher than your child.

I’m a different poster. Stop being obtuse. You prepped your kid for the test bc you knew it would artificially raise their score, which is the boost you clearly felt they needed to get in, otherwise you wouldn’t have done it. I didn’t prep my kid bc I knew they didn’t need to cheat to get in. I also don’t know or care what anyone else’s kid scored compared to mine. I do care that ppl are muddying the entire selection process by artificially raising scores through prep.

Also a new poster, but I think most people do it because they know 90% of the other parents are so it's the only way their kid will have a fair shake.

It’s not the only way for 90% of the kids to get a fair shot. It’s mostly the average kids with pushy parents that have difficulty qualifying. My estimate is the bottom quartile of the pool with parents chasing status and validation.

Many deserving kids get in without breaking a sweat. The true 95 percentile kid will get in with minimal effort, the 80-85 percentile kid will need to be dragged across the finish line through prepping, appeals, recommendations etc.

DP. Many 98th percentile+ kids get in without breaking a sweat. But some don't, which makes people with gifted kids worried that their kid may not get a random rejection or may have an off day on the testing day. So, they may prep to nudge that score a little higher. For the kids in the 85th-95th percentile band, the kids who get accepted are indistinguishable from the ones who don't get in, and getting accepted is kind of a crapshoot. It's understandable that parents want to do whatever they can to have their child on the AAP side of that fairly arbitrary line when their child is every bit as capable as many of the kids who get accepted into AAP and when the program takes nearly 20% of the FCPS population.

I think that's why the vast majority spend tens of thousands on prep these days. Most just aren't up to the task and it changes the playing field so that even kids that are naturally 95%+ can't compete without it.

This is such fantasy-based trolling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guidance on retesting:

https://support.pearson.com/usclinical/s/article/Clinical-Customer-Support-Test-Retest-Minimum-Time-Advice

Note that prepping is not taking the test over and over to exhaust the bank of questions. Prepping is taking “like” tests based on the interpretation of a third party on what concepts and format are relevant.

Right. This applies to enrolling at testing sites that “prep” AND going through practice tests w/ parents to understand why the right answer is correct and learning to apply that concept to other similar questions. It’s not how their brain actually interprets the question to arrive at the answer un-coached. That’s what this test is intended to show.

So now you’re an expert on how brain interprets questions!

No, I have a basic understanding of how aptitude tests work, which quite a number of you are clearly lacking.

It’s very basic, that’s for sure!

Although you claim to know how brain interprets questions, the intent of the test, the retesting validity and so on. I’m wondering what your credentials are that make your expertise so relevant.

Prepping does increase the scores, some of it from being familiar with the format, some from actually having a better understanding of the concept through learning. None constitute cheating. Take for example sorting based on a characteristic, you seem to be fine if this is learned at home using legos, but it’s a big no-no if the student explores sorting through a paid third party service that may be designed to match typical wisc sorting questions.

You are free to cheat as much as your conscience allows. There's no honor system for the Cogat test. Which is why FCPS ignores high scores.

I don't plan to take a cogat test any time soon. Feel free to justify for yourself that any high score is the direct result of cheating, because, of course, that's the only way anyone can score higher than your child.

I’m a different poster. Stop being obtuse. You prepped your kid for the test bc you knew it would artificially raise their score, which is the boost you clearly felt they needed to get in, otherwise you wouldn’t have done it. I didn’t prep my kid bc I knew they didn’t need to cheat to get in. I also don’t know or care what anyone else’s kid scored compared to mine. I do care that ppl are muddying the entire selection process by artificially raising scores through prep.

Also a new poster, but I think most people do it because they know 90% of the other parents are so it's the only way their kid will have a fair shake.

It’s not the only way for 90% of the kids to get a fair shot. It’s mostly the average kids with pushy parents that have difficulty qualifying. My estimate is the bottom quartile of the pool with parents chasing status and validation.

Many deserving kids get in without breaking a sweat. The true 95 percentile kid will get in with minimal effort, the 80-85 percentile kid will need to be dragged across the finish line through prepping, appeals, recommendations etc.

DP. Many 98th percentile+ kids get in without breaking a sweat. But some don't, which makes people with gifted kids worried that their kid may not get a random rejection or may have an off day on the testing day. So, they may prep to nudge that score a little higher. For the kids in the 85th-95th percentile band, the kids who get accepted are indistinguishable from the ones who don't get in, and getting accepted is kind of a crapshoot. It's understandable that parents want to do whatever they can to have their child on the AAP side of that fairly arbitrary line when their child is every bit as capable as many of the kids who get accepted into AAP and when the program takes nearly 20% of the FCPS population.

I think that's why the vast majority spend tens of thousands on prep these days. Most just aren't up to the task and it changes the playing field so that even kids that are naturally 95%+ can't compete without it.

What does naturally 95%+ mean? The kid would be 95% if nobody prepped, but now he’s only 75%, because of the prep arms race? Most tests are normed on a national sample so it shouldn’t matter. Maybe the kid is actually not 95%, but whatever the test indicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guidance on retesting:

https://support.pearson.com/usclinical/s/article/Clinical-Customer-Support-Test-Retest-Minimum-Time-Advice

Note that prepping is not taking the test over and over to exhaust the bank of questions. Prepping is taking “like” tests based on the interpretation of a third party on what concepts and format are relevant.

Right. This applies to enrolling at testing sites that “prep” AND going through practice tests w/ parents to understand why the right answer is correct and learning to apply that concept to other similar questions. It’s not how their brain actually interprets the question to arrive at the answer un-coached. That’s what this test is intended to show.

So now you’re an expert on how brain interprets questions!

No, I have a basic understanding of how aptitude tests work, which quite a number of you are clearly lacking.

It’s very basic, that’s for sure!

Although you claim to know how brain interprets questions, the intent of the test, the retesting validity and so on. I’m wondering what your credentials are that make your expertise so relevant.

Prepping does increase the scores, some of it from being familiar with the format, some from actually having a better understanding of the concept through learning. None constitute cheating. Take for example sorting based on a characteristic, you seem to be fine if this is learned at home using legos, but it’s a big no-no if the student explores sorting through a paid third party service that may be designed to match typical wisc sorting questions.

You are free to cheat as much as your conscience allows. There's no honor system for the Cogat test. Which is why FCPS ignores high scores.

I don't plan to take a cogat test any time soon. Feel free to justify for yourself that any high score is the direct result of cheating, because, of course, that's the only way anyone can score higher than your child.

I’m a different poster. Stop being obtuse. You prepped your kid for the test bc you knew it would artificially raise their score, which is the boost you clearly felt they needed to get in, otherwise you wouldn’t have done it. I didn’t prep my kid bc I knew they didn’t need to cheat to get in. I also don’t know or care what anyone else’s kid scored compared to mine. I do care that ppl are muddying the entire selection process by artificially raising scores through prep.

Also a new poster, but I think most people do it because they know 90% of the other parents are so it's the only way their kid will have a fair shake.

It’s not the only way for 90% of the kids to get a fair shot. It’s mostly the average kids with pushy parents that have difficulty qualifying. My estimate is the bottom quartile of the pool with parents chasing status and validation.

Many deserving kids get in without breaking a sweat. The true 95 percentile kid will get in with minimal effort, the 80-85 percentile kid will need to be dragged across the finish line through prepping, appeals, recommendations etc.

DP. Many 98th percentile+ kids get in without breaking a sweat. But some don't, which makes people with gifted kids worried that their kid may not get a random rejection or may have an off day on the testing day. So, they may prep to nudge that score a little higher. For the kids in the 85th-95th percentile band, the kids who get accepted are indistinguishable from the ones who don't get in, and getting accepted is kind of a crapshoot. It's understandable that parents want to do whatever they can to have their child on the AAP side of that fairly arbitrary line when their child is every bit as capable as many of the kids who get accepted into AAP and when the program takes nearly 20% of the FCPS population.

I think that's why the vast majority spend tens of thousands on prep these days. Most just aren't up to the task and it changes the playing field so that even kids that are naturally 95%+ can't compete without it.

This is such fantasy-based trolling.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guidance on retesting:

https://support.pearson.com/usclinical/s/article/Clinical-Customer-Support-Test-Retest-Minimum-Time-Advice

Note that prepping is not taking the test over and over to exhaust the bank of questions. Prepping is taking “like” tests based on the interpretation of a third party on what concepts and format are relevant.

Right. This applies to enrolling at testing sites that “prep” AND going through practice tests w/ parents to understand why the right answer is correct and learning to apply that concept to other similar questions. It’s not how their brain actually interprets the question to arrive at the answer un-coached. That’s what this test is intended to show.

So now you’re an expert on how brain interprets questions!

No, I have a basic understanding of how aptitude tests work, which quite a number of you are clearly lacking.

It’s very basic, that’s for sure!

Although you claim to know how brain interprets questions, the intent of the test, the retesting validity and so on. I’m wondering what your credentials are that make your expertise so relevant.

Prepping does increase the scores, some of it from being familiar with the format, some from actually having a better understanding of the concept through learning. None constitute cheating. Take for example sorting based on a characteristic, you seem to be fine if this is learned at home using legos, but it’s a big no-no if the student explores sorting through a paid third party service that may be designed to match typical wisc sorting questions.

You are free to cheat as much as your conscience allows. There's no honor system for the Cogat test. Which is why FCPS ignores high scores.

I don't plan to take a cogat test any time soon. Feel free to justify for yourself that any high score is the direct result of cheating, because, of course, that's the only way anyone can score higher than your child.

I’m a different poster. Stop being obtuse. You prepped your kid for the test bc you knew it would artificially raise their score, which is the boost you clearly felt they needed to get in, otherwise you wouldn’t have done it. I didn’t prep my kid bc I knew they didn’t need to cheat to get in. I also don’t know or care what anyone else’s kid scored compared to mine. I do care that ppl are muddying the entire selection process by artificially raising scores through prep.

Also a new poster, but I think most people do it because they know 90% of the other parents are so it's the only way their kid will have a fair shake.

It’s not the only way for 90% of the kids to get a fair shot. It’s mostly the average kids with pushy parents that have difficulty qualifying. My estimate is the bottom quartile of the pool with parents chasing status and validation.

Many deserving kids get in without breaking a sweat. The true 95 percentile kid will get in with minimal effort, the 80-85 percentile kid will need to be dragged across the finish line through prepping, appeals, recommendations etc.

DP. Many 98th percentile+ kids get in without breaking a sweat. But some don't, which makes people with gifted kids worried that their kid may not get a random rejection or may have an off day on the testing day. So, they may prep to nudge that score a little higher. For the kids in the 85th-95th percentile band, the kids who get accepted are indistinguishable from the ones who don't get in, and getting accepted is kind of a crapshoot. It's understandable that parents want to do whatever they can to have their child on the AAP side of that fairly arbitrary line when their child is every bit as capable as many of the kids who get accepted into AAP and when the program takes nearly 20% of the FCPS population.

So many things in life are like that, just wait until applying to college or for a job. There’s also many intangibles that contribute to the outcome: personality, how relatable to people, etc. Most do their best and move on to their next chapter and opportunity instead of complaining about how others are gaming the system through prepping.

From my experience, most of the people that complain about prepping are the ones that do it and don’t get the results they were hoping for. So then it’s just about making some excuses: my kid is naturally gifted, but the preppers spending tens of thousands crowded him out of his rightful spot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's simple:

When whites do it - it is an enrichment activity

When Asians do it - it is prepping, gaming the system and cheating

even though most Asians tend to be lower to middle class and thus engage in studying with books and going to after school class full of other students while whites engage in more expensive/intense 1 to 1 private tutoring for specific subjects as well as for other specific tests such as SAT, AP etc.

Exactly!

[Anonymous]

People are overstating the role of test scores in AAP acceptance. The equity report showed that GBRS is much more important and much more indicative of whether a kid gets accepted.

A "natural" 95th percentile kid with an unprepped 125 on the CogAT will still likely get in if the GBRS is high and the work samples are good. Likewise, high test scores plus a lower GBRS and poor work samples is a huge red flag for a kid who is heavily prepped but not gifted. That kid will likely get rejected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are overstating the role of test scores in AAP acceptance. The equity report showed that GBRS is much more important and much more indicative of whether a kid gets accepted.

A "natural" 95th percentile kid with an unprepped 125 on the CogAT will still likely get in if the GBRS is high and the work samples are good. Likewise, high test scores plus a lower GBRS and poor work samples is a huge red flag for a kid who is heavily prepped but not gifted. That kid will likely get rejected.

GBRS and work samples are probably the easiest to game by overzealous parents. I’d suspect it’s the other way around, great GBRS and work samples but low cogat, is more of a red flag.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, but over 90% of the kids who get in prepped for years. IF you don't believe me just go to a prep center some weekend and look at how many kids are there. There's good reason there are so many prep options here.

Faulty logic. Lots of people at prep centers doesn't mean 90% got in thru prep. Going to a prep center is not a guarantee of admission. Nearly everyone I know who went to Curie did not get in to TJ or AOS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are overstating the role of test scores in AAP acceptance. The equity report showed that GBRS is much more important and much more indicative of whether a kid gets accepted.

A "natural" 95th percentile kid with an unprepped 125 on the CogAT will still likely get in if the GBRS is high and the work samples are good. Likewise, high test scores plus a lower GBRS and poor work samples is a huge red flag for a kid who is heavily prepped but not gifted. That kid will likely get rejected.

GBRS and work samples are probably the easiest to game by overzealous parents. I’d suspect it’s the other way around, great GBRS and work samples but low cogat, is more of a red flag.

How on earth can you game the GBRS?? That is all at school by teachers. Work samples, yes… GBRS, no!

[Anonymous]

I absolutely loved this fan fiction!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, but over 90% of the kids who get in prepped for years. IF you don't believe me just go to a prep center some weekend and look at how many kids are there. There's good reason there are so many prep options here.

Faulty logic. Lots of people at prep centers doesn't mean 90% got in thru prep. Going to a prep center is not a guarantee of admission. Nearly everyone I know who went to Curie did not get in to TJ or AOS.

Actually, no, their logic seems based on fact. Especially since just one of the many NVA prep centers claimed to have accounted for 30% of the entering class. Also, in my DD AAP class, the teacher polled the kids to see who had prepped for admission, and they said almost everyone raised their hands. I know it's not formal, but it sure seems like kids who are honest and unashamed of admitting this is far more reliable than a bunch of overzealous tiger parents. I get it you want to downplay this to help keep the competition down but I think the cats out of the bag.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are overstating the role of test scores in AAP acceptance. The equity report showed that GBRS is much more important and much more indicative of whether a kid gets accepted.

A "natural" 95th percentile kid with an unprepped 125 on the CogAT will still likely get in if the GBRS is high and the work samples are good. Likewise, high test scores plus a lower GBRS and poor work samples is a huge red flag for a kid who is heavily prepped but not gifted. That kid will likely get rejected.

GBRS and work samples are probably the easiest to game by overzealous parents. I’d suspect it’s the other way around, great GBRS and work samples but low cogat, is more of a red flag.

How on earth can you game the GBRS?? That is all at school by teachers. Work samples, yes… GBRS, no!

Here’s how: make your Christmas gift card count, being the room parent, raising money for ‘class supplies’, volunteering to help with the math groups etc.

Essentially everything the rich stay at home moms do to ingratiate themselves to the teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I absolutely loved this fan fiction!

agree this is laughable stuff

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guidance on retesting:

https://support.pearson.com/usclinical/s/article/Clinical-Customer-Support-Test-Retest-Minimum-Time-Advice

Note that prepping is not taking the test over and over to exhaust the bank of questions. Prepping is taking “like” tests based on the interpretation of a third party on what concepts and format are relevant.

Right. This applies to enrolling at testing sites that “prep” AND going through practice tests w/ parents to understand why the right answer is correct and learning to apply that concept to other similar questions. It’s not how their brain actually interprets the question to arrive at the answer un-coached. That’s what this test is intended to show.

So now you’re an expert on how brain interprets questions!

No, I have a basic understanding of how aptitude tests work, which quite a number of you are clearly lacking.

It’s very basic, that’s for sure!

Although you claim to know how brain interprets questions, the intent of the test, the retesting validity and so on. I’m wondering what your credentials are that make your expertise so relevant.

Prepping does increase the scores, some of it from being familiar with the format, some from actually having a better understanding of the concept through learning. None constitute cheating. Take for example sorting based on a characteristic, you seem to be fine if this is learned at home using legos, but it’s a big no-no if the student explores sorting through a paid third party service that may be designed to match typical wisc sorting questions.

You are free to cheat as much as your conscience allows. There's no honor system for the Cogat test. Which is why FCPS ignores high scores.

I don't plan to take a cogat test any time soon. Feel free to justify for yourself that any high score is the direct result of cheating, because, of course, that's the only way anyone can score higher than your child.

I’m a different poster. Stop being obtuse. You prepped your kid for the test bc you knew it would artificially raise their score, which is the boost you clearly felt they needed to get in, otherwise you wouldn’t have done it. I didn’t prep my kid bc I knew they didn’t need to cheat to get in. I also don’t know or care what anyone else’s kid scored compared to mine. I do care that ppl are muddying the entire selection process by artificially raising scores through prep.

Also a new poster, but I think most people do it because they know 90% of the other parents are so it's the only way their kid will have a fair shake.

It’s not the only way for 90% of the kids to get a fair shot. It’s mostly the average kids with pushy parents that have difficulty qualifying. My estimate is the bottom quartile of the pool with parents chasing status and validation.

Many deserving kids get in without breaking a sweat. The true 95 percentile kid will get in with minimal effort, the 80-85 percentile kid will need to be dragged across the finish line through prepping, appeals, recommendations etc.

DP. Many 98th percentile+ kids get in without breaking a sweat. But some don't, which makes people with gifted kids worried that their kid may not get a random rejection or may have an off day on the testing day. So, they may prep to nudge that score a little higher. For the kids in the 85th-95th percentile band, the kids who get accepted are indistinguishable from the ones who don't get in, and getting accepted is kind of a crapshoot. It's understandable that parents want to do whatever they can to have their child on the AAP side of that fairly arbitrary line when their child is every bit as capable as many of the kids who get accepted into AAP and when the program takes nearly 20% of the FCPS population.

I think that's why the vast majority spend tens of thousands on prep these days. Most just aren't up to the task and it changes the playing field so that even kids that are naturally 95%+ can't compete without it.

This is such fantasy-based trolling.

Sure, but it's so entertaining to read their fictions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are overstating the role of test scores in AAP acceptance. The equity report showed that GBRS is much more important and much more indicative of whether a kid gets accepted.

A "natural" 95th percentile kid with an unprepped 125 on the CogAT will still likely get in if the GBRS is high and the work samples are good. Likewise, high test scores plus a lower GBRS and poor work samples is a huge red flag for a kid who is heavily prepped but not gifted. That kid will likely get rejected.

GBRS and work samples are probably the easiest to game by overzealous parents. I’d suspect it’s the other way around, great GBRS and work samples but low cogat, is more of a red flag.

How on earth can you game the GBRS?? That is all at school by teachers. Work samples, yes… GBRS, no!

I have seen many parents give expensive gifts/presents to 'key' teachers and administrators and cater the entire school for lunch, pay for school supplies etc. for years to 'prepare' the key staff/administrators to ensure admission to AAP. This begins in kindergarten.