FCPS Appeals decision are out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I am also reading here is that kids with lower Cogats and relatively average WISCs are getting in. And kids with skyrocketing WISCs and cogats are being denied. This is so lame. Happy for people whose kids have gotten in but this is fishy. It also varies clearly per school. Frankly, a school with majority Asian kids is much more competitive in terms of this stuff. Ironically, people move to these areas because these schools rank high (due to the test scores etc.) and their kids are held back because every other child is a 99 percenter. Bigger and diverse school populations leave more room to admit people with lower scores. I know this for a fact as I know multiple people in both of these environments. Now I see why people in the best neighborhoods and school districts move to private schools.

Buy a bigger/nicer house in a so-called "bad" (i.e. Title I) school district. Apply for AAP from your new school and gain easy admission to the Center. Sounds like a win-win!

We go to a Title 1 school with a 134 COGAT and 134 WISC and didn’t get in on appeal.

You base school does not matter. Living in a home that is zoned to a center school that's under enrolled may perhaps help, I am not convinced of this logic though

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I am also reading here is that kids with lower Cogats and relatively average WISCs are getting in. And kids with skyrocketing WISCs and cogats are being denied. This is so lame. Happy for people whose kids have gotten in but this is fishy. It also varies clearly per school. Frankly, a school with majority Asian kids is much more competitive in terms of this stuff. Ironically, people move to these areas because these schools rank high (due to the test scores etc.) and their kids are held back because every other child is a 99 percenter. Bigger and diverse school populations leave more room to admit people with lower scores. I know this for a fact as I know multiple people in both of these environments. Now I see why people in the best neighborhoods and school districts move to private schools.

Buy a bigger/nicer house in a so-called "bad" (i.e. Title I) school district. Apply for AAP from your new school and gain easy admission to the Center. Sounds like a win-win!

We go to a Title 1 school with a 134 COGAT and 134 WISC and didn’t get in on appeal.

Zoned to which center?

[Anonymous]

There are a LOT of discrepancies. Maybe, if the AAP board actually clarified what holistic meant and how much they weigh various factors, so many of us would not be questioning... Also, here is a suggestion for the appeal board. Maybe even interview the kids? See how well the communicate! That should be part of a holistic process, no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are a LOT of discrepancies. Maybe, if the AAP board actually clarified what holistic meant and how much they weigh various factors, so many of us would not be questioning... Also, here is a suggestion for the appeal board. Maybe even interview the kids? See how well the communicate! That should be part of a holistic process, no?

There isn't some magical formula. It's not like they have some sort of scale or point system for each score or each bit of evidence. It really is a panel of people who individually read your child's file and then decide whether they feel that your child should be in AAP or not. It's completely subjective, and they could be persuaded to let in kids with lower stats if the parents make a compelling argument as to why the kid needs AAP. It's also why they can't give answers now as to why any individual kids are rejected. They don't have some paper in the file saying "Rejected - GBRS too low" or "Rejected - kid probably prepped" or whatever. The only thing they know is that the majority of the people on your child's review panel read the file and decided that they didn't feel like your kid needed AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are a LOT of discrepancies. Maybe, if the AAP board actually clarified what holistic meant and how much they weigh various factors, so many of us would not be questioning... Also, here is a suggestion for the appeal board. Maybe even interview the kids? See how well the communicate! That should be part of a holistic process, no?

FCPS has way too many applicants to make this feasible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are a LOT of discrepancies. Maybe, if the AAP board actually clarified what holistic meant and how much they weigh various factors, so many of us would not be questioning... Also, here is a suggestion for the appeal board. Maybe even interview the kids? See how well the communicate! That should be part of a holistic process, no?

Just hope that the SCT rules that AA or use of race in admissions decision is unconstitutional so that all these totally subjective "Holistic Review" is not allowed anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son did not get in on appeal. (Grade 3) To me, it is RIDICULOUS and I agree. DEMAND Re-evaluation. This makes NO SENSE. If there is a petition, I want to SIGN IT! I think due to Covid, less space in the programs!!!

NNAT (Dont remember but was high!)
COGAT (127)
WISC: 133 (99th Percentile)

My son is in Mensa, literally has a Patent Pending for a new game invention he created, and was recommended by a PhD who was an expert on gifted children and written text books (tutors my son) who said he is exceptionally gifted. He is an athlete, a musician, and an amazing public speaker. Does the kid have to be a CEO?

Mensa’s bar is not that high for kids. Your son’s cogat wasn’t at the benchmark and I assume if the nnat was at least at the benchmark, you’d have remembered the score.

I have no idea what you mean when you say your son’s tutor Is an expert on gifted kids.

It sounds like you think your son’s file was screaming gifted. It sounds to me more like it screamed YOU think he’s gifted. Please understand, I have no idea if he’s gifted or not. I’m just addressing how the file presented (with one score definitely above what is believed to be the cut off - wisc). The Mensa admission is duplicative of the wisc score since admission seems to be based on that. The LOR seems more like a throwaway; just saying they LOR is from an “expert” in gifted kids means it was likely not considered heavily. You don’t mention the gbrs.

My son’s school does NOT administer GBRS. Only notes, and not a specific score. I’m not saying he’s gifted. My point is that his score is high enough to be admitted into as ADVANCED program. This is NOT supposed to be a gifted program. And why are kids with lower scores getting in?? My point in Nensa is that they DO allow kids in with a certain IQ. But yet not good enough for the school ? My son has Multiple other activities and referrals at which he has excelled. I’m not just speaking for him. I’m speaking for kids who are even MORE deserving than him here with WISCs of 147 and 149 being rejected. Please explain the logic. In fact, Cogats are commonly prepped for. NOT the WISC.

WISCs are definitely prepped for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son did not get in on appeal. (Grade 3) To me, it is RIDICULOUS and I agree. DEMAND Re-evaluation. This makes NO SENSE. If there is a petition, I want to SIGN IT! I think due to Covid, less space in the programs!!!

NNAT (Dont remember but was high!)
COGAT (127)
WISC: 133 (99th Percentile)

My son is in Mensa, literally has a Patent Pending for a new game invention he created, and was recommended by a PhD who was an expert on gifted children and written text books (tutors my son) who said he is exceptionally gifted. He is an athlete, a musician, and an amazing public speaker. Does the kid have to be a CEO?

Mensa’s bar is not that high for kids. Your son’s cogat wasn’t at the benchmark and I assume if the nnat was at least at the benchmark, you’d have remembered the score.

I have no idea what you mean when you say your son’s tutor Is an expert on gifted kids.

It sounds like you think your son’s file was screaming gifted. It sounds to me more like it screamed YOU think he’s gifted. Please understand, I have no idea if he’s gifted or not. I’m just addressing how the file presented (with one score definitely above what is believed to be the cut off - wisc). The Mensa admission is duplicative of the wisc score since admission seems to be based on that. The LOR seems more like a throwaway; just saying they LOR is from an “expert” in gifted kids means it was likely not considered heavily. You don’t mention the gbrs.

My son’s school does NOT administer GBRS. Only notes, and not a specific score. I’m not saying he’s gifted. My point is that his score is high enough to be admitted into as ADVANCED program. This is NOT supposed to be a gifted program. And why are kids with lower scores getting in?? My point in Nensa is that they DO allow kids in with a certain IQ. But yet not good enough for the school ? My son has Multiple other activities and referrals at which he has excelled. I’m not just speaking for him. I’m speaking for kids who are even MORE deserving than him here with WISCs of 147 and 149 being rejected. Please explain the logic. In fact, Cogats are commonly prepped for. NOT the WISC.

WISCs are definitely prepped for.

Or paid for.

[Anonymous]

I see a common theme for rejections after reading many of these threads. Is it possible that parents who have tutors submit recommendations and who heavily enrich their children are more likely to be denied? I think if I was on the selection committee and I read that a child has a tutor or participated in expensive enrichment classes, I would think the high scores were just a result of the heavy enrichment (something most other kids could achieve if they had similiar priviledge). I might not think this kid "needed" aap because their parents could just continue to enrich on their own.

OTOH if I read about a child who had a high interest in a specific subject (i.e. bridges), work samples included the child's bridge designs, parent and teacher commentary included how the child was always researching bridges and how the child even got into a little trouble for building bridges during class time, I might think this child "needed" aap for i.e. the flexibility in learning, specialized teachers, etc.

[Anonymous]

I think it is awful that people are on here on a thread about APPEALS saying that “WISCS are prepped for” or “PAID for.” The WISC is a main test listed for appeal. They are taken at credited centers with licensed professionals. I am not sure what you mean by “paid for.” Yes, you pay to take the test. And yes, it’s worth it, if anything to find out your child’s strengths and weaknesses in detail by a Psychologist. Are you suggesting people pay for high scores? That’s quite an accusation on a thread about appeals where most people’s kids here have taken the WISC and scored highly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see a common theme for rejections after reading many of these threads. Is it possible that parents who have tutors submit recommendations and who heavily enrich their children are more likely to be denied? I think if I was on the selection committee and I read that a child has a tutor or participated in expensive enrichment classes, I would think the high scores were just a result of the heavy enrichment (something most other kids could achieve if they had similiar priviledge). I might not think this kid "needed" aap because their parents could just continue to enrich on their own.

OTOH if I read about a child who had a high interest in a specific subject (i.e. bridges), work samples included the child's bridge designs, parent and teacher commentary included how the child was always researching bridges and how the child even got into a little trouble for building bridges during class time, I might think this child "needed" aap for i.e. the flexibility in learning, specialized teachers, etc.

Many people used tutors during the COVID-19 Virtual downtime. Because they were working and didn’t have time. Tutors are pretty common to use. They work with the kids. So they know them and their working style. I would think they are a good gauge in addition to the other coaches etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a common theme for rejections after reading many of these threads. Is it possible that parents who have tutors submit recommendations and who heavily enrich their children are more likely to be denied? I think if I was on the selection committee and I read that a child has a tutor or participated in expensive enrichment classes, I would think the high scores were just a result of the heavy enrichment (something most other kids could achieve if they had similiar priviledge). I might not think this kid "needed" aap because their parents could just continue to enrich on their own.

OTOH if I read about a child who had a high interest in a specific subject (i.e. bridges), work samples included the child's bridge designs, parent and teacher commentary included how the child was always researching bridges and how the child even got into a little trouble for building bridges during class time, I might think this child "needed" aap for i.e. the flexibility in learning, specialized teachers, etc.

Many people used tutors during the COVID-19 Virtual downtime. Because they were working and didn’t have time. Tutors are pretty common to use. They work with the kids. So they know them and their working style. I would think they are a good gauge in addition to the other coaches etc.

PP here. But that would emphasize your priviledge and thus your lack of need for aap. How amazing for a child that self taught themselves subjects or maintained academic advancement is the face of covid hardships (lack of parental support, loss of parent, special need, esl, etc.).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
WISCs are definitely prepped for.

People might try to prep for a WISC, but there's no evidence that doing so will increase a kid's score by more than a few points. If the kid seems overly prepared, the psychologist will make a note of that in the report, and the IQ score will be considered invalid. WISC questions and even the nature of the questions are more closely guarded than those for CogAT or NNAT, and the test is much more comprehensive. People who are going to prep will just do so for the CogAT and NNAT, as prepping can increase those scores by 10 or so points without that much effort.

I think the naysayers in this thread either don't understand or don't believe in IQ tests. FSIQ scores above 140 are ridiculously high. I don't care if those kids are showing nothing at all to their teachers. They are beyond gifted and need gifted services. The gap between an IQ 140 kid and most of the kids in AAP is the same as the gap between a typical AAP kid and a completely average kid. Kids who score just a 130 are still going to be among the smartest kids within AAP, so keeping them out is silly. The only reason scores above 130 don't "seem high" is that IQ tests from 30 years ago either used ratio scales or were inflated, so more kids received high scores.

[Anonymous]

17:37 again. As absurd as the committee decisions are, I don't think the committee is rejecting people with high WISC scores because they're worried about prepping. I think they're largely discounting the WISC scores altogether, because the equity report cited them as an avenue for AAP acceptance that is only available to privileged families.

I kind of agree that any indication of tutoring or outside enrichment may hurt a kid's chances. We've seen private school kids get rejected with very high scores, and it seems like if they think you can easily afford private, you should just stay there. It seems like there is a crackdown on any kids that they perceive as privileged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see a common theme for rejections after reading many of these threads. Is it possible that parents who have tutors submit recommendations and who heavily enrich their children are more likely to be denied? I think if I was on the selection committee and I read that a child has a tutor or participated in expensive enrichment classes, I would think the high scores were just a result of the heavy enrichment (something most other kids could achieve if they had similar privilege). I might not think this kid "needed" aap because their parents could just continue to enrich on their own.

OTOH if I read about a child who had a high interest in a specific subject (i.e. bridges), work samples included the child's bridge designs, parent and teacher commentary included how the child was always researching bridges and how the child even got into a little trouble for building bridges during class time, I might think this child "needed" aap for i.e. the flexibility in learning, specialized teachers, etc.

Excellent point and I think this could very well be a factor.