Are advanced placement tests scaled for age differences of 2nd graders?

[spinone]

My first child just started 2nd grade last week in Fairfax Cty. At back to school night on Wed the teacher said they will administer a test soon to determine eligibility for advanced programs starting next year in 3rd grade.

I have noticed that many of my son's new classmates are at least a year older than he is (not to mention a head taller). It seems to me the much older 2nd grade kids would have an advantage on these types of tests (unless I think if they are true IQ tests). Does anyone know if the test is scaled in any way to account for the dramatic age difference of 2nd graders? My child's no genius but he is bright for a very young 2nd grader so I was just wondering if they account for age differences in evaluating opportunites for children.

Any thoughts would be much appreciated!

Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Yes, they are scaled. Read about CogAT (Google it) and if your child missed the NNAT2 test in 1st grade, Google that as well.

[Anonymous]

They are age scaled in ages broken down by quarters of the year. So, it is not exact, but closer than comparing a just-turned-six-year old with an almost-eight-year-old.

[Anonymous]

Say, a child with a October 2003 birthday and a child with an April 2004 birthday take the test. Both score exactly the same. The April child would get a higher overall score, because he/she is six months younger.

Does that help?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Say, a child with a October 2003 birthday and a child with an April 2004 birthday take the test. Both score exactly the same. The April child would get a higher overall score, because he/she is six months younger.

Does that help?

Exactly correct. My DD is October B-day and had a friend with July B-day. Both had very similary "raw scores" but scaled score was very different. It actually made the difference between making the cut-off (130).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Say, a child with a October 2003 birthday and a child with an April 2004 birthday take the test. Both score exactly the same. The April child would get a higher overall score, because he/she is six months younger.

Does that help?

Exactly correct. My DD is October B-day and had a friend with July B-day. Both had very similary "raw scores" but scaled score was very different. It actually made the difference between making the cut-off (130).

Which while it makes sense for a true score on the test, makes no sense when choosing whether they will get into the program. Kids of all ages are in there. If both kids got 45 out of 48, they should theoretically do about the same in class. The younger one is going to have to keep up with the older students who had to get a higher raw score to get the same test score.

[Anonymous]

Yes. My DD got 100% on raw score, but 3 points were deducted for age.
Kind of doesn't make sense, she can never get full points.

[Anonymous]

Yes. My DD got 100% on raw score, but 3 points were deducted for age.
Kind of doesn't make sense, she can never get full points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Which while it makes sense for a true score on the test, makes no sense when choosing whether they will get into the program. Kids of all ages are in there. If both kids got 45 out of 48, they should theoretically do about the same in class. The younger one is going to have to keep up with the older students who had to get a higher raw score to get the same test score.

Not necessarily. Older children are probably going to have some advantages with self-confidence. But there's a reason IQ tests scale for age. At a certain point, a younger child with a higher IQ can academically pass an older child who has an IQ that isn't as high. Consider two cars going from point A to point B. The yellow car leaves first and drives at a good clip. The orange car leaves a little bit later, but drives even faster. Compare them shortly after they start their journey and the yellow car is probably still ahead, but visit them again at point B and the orange car got there first.

While there isn't really a one-size-fits-all option (and the schools don't give true IQ tests—they are group tests), the schools need to make a cutoff somewhere. Younger and older children shouldn't be rewarded or punished for their age differences. The age scale is an attempt to compensate. Thus equalize them. Children withe the same percentiles should, in theory, end up performing about the same in school. Individual results may vary.

If an older child gets a perfect raw score, but has 3 percentile points deducted for age, then consider an individual test that will be well suited to the child's age.

[Anonymous]

If my barely 6 year old can do as well as your 7.5 year old on the same test... I think that's evidence that my 6 year old IS, in fact, smarter than your 7.5 year old. The older child has had an extra year and a half of life learning, exposure, and opportunity to ponder/make connections. (I don't actually have a 6 year old, so I'm just using this as an example).

That 6 yr. old has shown that s/he has the analytical skills or reading skills to overcome the 7.5 yr. old's advantage that comes from experience, brain development and additional opportunities.

So, I definitely agree that age-scaled scores are the appropriate way to measure and to assess giftedness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If my barely 6 year old can do as well as your 7.5 year old on the same test... I think that's evidence that my 6 year old IS, in fact, smarter than your 7.5 year old. The older child has had an extra year and a half of life learning, exposure, and opportunity to ponder/make connections. (I don't actually have a 6 year old, so I'm just using this as an example).

That 6 yr. old has shown that s/he has the analytical skills or reading skills to overcome the 7.5 yr. old's advantage that comes from experience, brain development and additional opportunities.

So, I definitely agree that age-scaled scores are the appropriate way to measure and to assess giftedness.

Again in my DD's case, you never know. She got 48 out of 48. How can she prove that she has skills overcome 9 yr. olds, but your 6 year is not quiet there?

So I think it's unfair for my DD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If my barely 6 year old can do as well as your 7.5 year old on the same test... I think that's evidence that my 6 year old IS, in fact, smarter than your 7.5 year old. The older child has had an extra year and a half of life learning, exposure, and opportunity to ponder/make connections. (I don't actually have a 6 year old, so I'm just using this as an example).

That 6 yr. old has shown that s/he has the analytical skills or reading skills to overcome the 7.5 yr. old's advantage that comes from experience, brain development and additional opportunities.

So, I definitely agree that age-scaled scores are the appropriate way to measure and to assess giftedness.

Again in my DD's case, you never know. She got 48 out of 48. How can she prove that she has skills overcome 9 yr. olds, but your 6 year is not quiet there?

So I think it's unfair for my DD.

While I'm not disagreeing that a 6-year old who scores a 45 is probably "smarter" than a 7.5-year old who scores a 45, my point was that the 6-year old and 7.5-year old will be in class togther. At age 7.5, the current 6-year old will probably outperform how the current 7.5 year old is now doing. But these two will be in class together. And regardless of their age, they are performing at the same level at a given point in time.

Like the PP above, my child got a 48 out of 48 on one of the CogAT tests. Her scaled score was a 146. A younger child had the potential to get a 160 (or 150, whatever the perfect score was). My child did not.

[Anonymous]

If they both can answer 45 questions correctly out of 48, then they both have what it takes to succeed in AAP. I don't think you can say that the 6 yr. old who answers 45 questions right is not going to meet the demands of AAP.

When comparing kids, the scaled scores make sense. I see your point about a 7.5 yr. old topping out. But, does it matter? Whether a child has a 150 or a 160, those are both exceptional scores -- and the 6 yr. old who can meet the same number of correct answers as a 7.5 yr old should be given "extra credit" for doing it at a younger age. So, maybe you can think of 150 as the max score and then a younger child can get bonus points for getting the max at a younger age. In any case, I wouldn't be complaining if my child had a 150!