NGAT results are available

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

define disruptive. If you are referring to Defiant, argumentative, and constantly correct teachers and telling teachers a more efficient way, making passive aggressive jokes and emotional outbursts when not heard, that’s not disruptive, that’s an exceptionally gifted mind at play ( IQ test above 99.9%, usually above 145 on WISC tests). These kids cannot function in a normal classroom, general ed classroom teachers don’t understand them, they don’t obey, they process information very differently. If they remain in those class they will not thrive academically. The general classroom’s mission is to train future workforce that follow rules and obey society’s standards, and don’t thin on their own. Like most adults today, they get the news and believe it as it is, and never think of the deep implications and meaning, and whom might want you to believe that way. These kids mind don’t work like that they find issues and make things better, the last thing they want to do is learn something and accept it as it is, they test what they learned until it doesn’t work. Human society moves forward because of these type of people that challenge the status quo. When these kids move to a place with similar minds they feel heard and challenged the teacher together, AAP teachers are usually ok with these, half of my older kids’ class are like this, they pack together and challenge the teacher and back each other up. When he was in general ed classroom in 2nd grade, he was the one being yelled at constantly by the teacher, and eventually he told the teacher that she should go back to school instead of teaching.

From the parents of a kid who is an AAP student, boy you sound SO cocky!!! You are labeling kids who are 8 and deciding that kids in the general classrooms will be worker bees. First of all, Fairfax and maybe Palo Alto CA are some of the very very few districts who even do the AAP thing SO early. Some of the best districts don’t offer AP until high school or middle at best! And here in Fairfax, we label kids and their entire life at age 7. Ridiculous. Chill out. They are kids.

And oh, “gifted kids” are badly behaved too. Because their parents excuse their bad behavior for being “gifted.” Even gifted kids need to learn to follow directions and respect the classroom! Rules apply to all. Get off your high horse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

define disruptive. If you are referring to Defiant, argumentative, and constantly correct teachers and telling teachers a more efficient way, making passive aggressive jokes and emotional outbursts when not heard, that’s not disruptive, that’s an exceptionally gifted mind at play ( IQ test above 99.9%, usually above 145 on WISC tests). These kids cannot function in a normal classroom, general ed classroom teachers don’t understand them, they don’t obey, they process information very differently. If they remain in those class they will not thrive academically. The general classroom’s mission is to train future workforce that follow rules and obey society’s standards, and don’t thin on their own. Like most adults today, they get the news and believe it as it is, and never think of the deep implications and meaning, and whom might want you to believe that way. These kids mind don’t work like that they find issues and make things better, the last thing they want to do is learn something and accept it as it is, they test what they learned until it doesn’t work. Human society moves forward because of these type of people that challenge the status quo. When these kids move to a place with similar minds they feel heard and challenged the teacher together, AAP teachers are usually ok with these, half of my older kids’ class are like this, they pack together and challenge the teacher and back each other up. When he was in general ed classroom in 2nd grade, he was the one being yelled at constantly by the teacher, and eventually he told the teacher that she should go back to school instead of teaching.

Disruptive as in taking a classmates project and stomping on it, taking another classmates folder and throwing it across the room or pushing their classmates for fun. Also an AAP classroom is not filled with budding Einsteins! I know because I’ve already had two in this program in a very highly regarded center school. As the PP said, it is mainly a classroom of hard working kids who are ambitious and want to excel but in no way are they all going to challenge the status quo and change the fabric of human society.

Also if your child told their teacher to go back to school instead of teaching, that just reflects on your poor parenting. No matter how academically advanced a child is, disrespect and unkindness should never be tolerated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Totally fair. Someone did post a url that had a PowerPoint that made it seem like the distribution was 100 with a std dev of 15 or 16, but it was not a bastion of clarity.

Immaterial now, but in case anyone is keeping track for future years, 139 on NGAT was not a universal screener score for my kid.

I'm the PP who posted the link. Assuming the sample report in the slide describes the same set of 3 tests that FCPS 2nd graders took, it seems clear to me that total standard score as well as the 3 individual standard scores are based on the same normal distribution with mean 100 and sd 15. Note that the percentile is given for total score in that sample report. Disclaimer is that I have no way of being certain that it is indeed the same scoring and sample that generated FCPS results.

So total score 130+ likely still means the student's total of 3 tests is better than 2sd above national average. A plausible guess is that the individual total score just sums the 3 raw scores (none of which are known to us) and then was mapped to the national sample distribution of such raw score totals.

Regardless, it is surprising that 139 total score wasn't enough to be in top 10% within that school. In statistical sense, a small (=high sampling error) AND very selective (=high sampling bias) sample can still make that happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

define disruptive. If you are referring to Defiant, argumentative, and constantly correct teachers and telling teachers a more efficient way, making passive aggressive jokes and emotional outbursts when not heard, that’s not disruptive, that’s an exceptionally gifted mind at play ( IQ test above 99.9%, usually above 145 on WISC tests). These kids cannot function in a normal classroom, general ed classroom teachers don’t understand them, they don’t obey, they process information very differently. If they remain in those class they will not thrive academically. The general classroom’s mission is to train future workforce that follow rules and obey society’s standards, and don’t thin on their own. Like most adults today, they get the news and believe it as it is, and never think of the deep implications and meaning, and whom might want you to believe that way. These kids mind don’t work like that they find issues and make things better, the last thing they want to do is learn something and accept it as it is, they test what they learned until it doesn’t work. Human society moves forward because of these type of people that challenge the status quo. When these kids move to a place with similar minds they feel heard and challenged the teacher together, AAP teachers are usually ok with these, half of my older kids’ class are like this, they pack together and challenge the teacher and back each other up. When he was in general ed classroom in 2nd grade, he was the one being yelled at constantly by the teacher, and eventually he told the teacher that she should go back to school instead of teaching.

From the parents of a kid who is an AAP student, boy you sound SO cocky!!! You are labeling kids who are 8 and deciding that kids in the general classrooms will be worker bees. First of all, Fairfax and maybe Palo Alto CA are some of the very very few districts who even do the AAP thing SO early. Some of the best districts don’t offer AP until high school or middle at best! And here in Fairfax, we label kids and their entire life at age 7. Ridiculous. Chill out. They are kids.

And oh, “gifted kids” are badly behaved too. Because their parents excuse their bad behavior for being “gifted.” Even gifted kids need to learn to follow directions and respect the classroom! Rules apply to all. Get off your high horse.

they don’t learn by yelling at and told no to. They learn by reasoning, discussing, guiding, and have them stand in other people’s shoes. Just so you know, these kids are teenagers’ mind in a 2nd grader’s body. There are plenty of research papers in DC urban mom that explains their minds. You believe in what you believe in, but if you want to see how human society really works, just look around, observe and think for yourself for once, and what do you see? Just want to put this out here, so people can make a reality check, I’m not here to polarize you guys like the news is doing today. I’m here to guide you to another way of thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

define disruptive. If you are referring to Defiant, argumentative, and constantly correct teachers and telling teachers a more efficient way, making passive aggressive jokes and emotional outbursts when not heard, that’s not disruptive, that’s an exceptionally gifted mind at play ( IQ test above 99.9%, usually above 145 on WISC tests). These kids cannot function in a normal classroom, general ed classroom teachers don’t understand them, they don’t obey, they process information very differently. If they remain in those class they will not thrive academically. The general classroom’s mission is to train future workforce that follow rules and obey society’s standards, and don’t thin on their own. Like most adults today, they get the news and believe it as it is, and never think of the deep implications and meaning, and whom might want you to believe that way. These kids mind don’t work like that they find issues and make things better, the last thing they want to do is learn something and accept it as it is, they test what they learned until it doesn’t work. Human society moves forward because of these type of people that challenge the status quo. When these kids move to a place with similar minds they feel heard and challenged the teacher together, AAP teachers are usually ok with these, half of my older kids’ class are like this, they pack together and challenge the teacher and back each other up. When he was in general ed classroom in 2nd grade, he was the one being yelled at constantly by the teacher, and eventually he told the teacher that she should go back to school instead of teaching.

You sound like you're a fun parent to be around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Totally fair. Someone did post a url that had a PowerPoint that made it seem like the distribution was 100 with a std dev of 15 or 16, but it was not a bastion of clarity.

Immaterial now, but in case anyone is keeping track for future years, 139 on NGAT was not a universal screener score for my kid.

I'm the PP who posted the link. Assuming the sample report in the slide describes the same set of 3 tests that FCPS 2nd graders took, it seems clear to me that total standard score as well as the 3 individual standard scores are based on the same normal distribution with mean 100 and sd 15. Note that the percentile is given for total score in that sample report. Disclaimer is that I have no way of being certain that it is indeed the same scoring and sample that generated FCPS results.

So total score 130+ likely still means the student's total of 3 tests is better than 2sd above national average. A plausible guess is that the individual total score just sums the 3 raw scores (none of which are known to us) and then was mapped to the national sample distribution of such raw score totals.

Regardless, it is surprising that 139 total score wasn't enough to be in top 10% within that school. In statistical sense, a small (=high sampling error) AND very selective (=high sampling bias) sample can still make that happen.

A very small number of schools are extremely biased samples, especially those in certain McLean/Langley feeder areas. These are the schools that have a highly educated parent population who care deeply about getting into the program. It wouldn’t be unbelievable for there to be 7 kids out of 70 that scored 140 and up. That’s why these areas also send disproportionate numbers to TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

Yup. People point this out regularly, but it doesn't seem to matter. AAP does go into a bit more depth. Advanced Math is good but not enough for kids who are strong at math. AAP classes have kids who are disruptive in them, there are kids with ADHD and other issues who are very smart and capable but who have the impulse control issues and emotional regulation issues that come with ADHD.

And there are plenty of smart kids who could care less about school and don't apply themselves, regardless of how strong a teacher they have. You can be smart and not curious. You can be smart and do the work easily enough and not care to push yourself.

There are plenty of above average kids who are curious and push themselves and do well in a program like AAP. It is a challenge for those students, and that is a good thing.

AAP is nice to have but it isn't a gifted program, it really doesn't meet the needs of the kids who are in the 99th percentile and curious.

I’m an educator and title of “gifted” is given away much too frequently. Every other parent walks in saying their kid is “gifted.” I certainly don’t see that gifted behavior in my classroom! Gifted kids are still writing two sentences instead of a full story. Smart hard working kids, are however, completing things, asking questions etc. Frankly I prefer the latter.

Also, I have a middle schooler who is a very smart kid in AAP. I wouldn’t say he’s gifted. He’s very bright and works hard and does way better than the so called gifted.

Fully agreed. I went to a TJ kind of school and in my year there was one girl who was truly gifted. Everyone was very very smart and hardworking, went to best universities etc etc but she was just something else. Very humble, introverted, would never interrupt class or talk without being asked, but she just operated on another level in math. AAP is not about serving this kind of talent, it’s a much broader group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

define disruptive. If you are referring to Defiant, argumentative, and constantly correct teachers and telling teachers a more efficient way, making passive aggressive jokes and emotional outbursts when not heard, that’s not disruptive, that’s an exceptionally gifted mind at play ( IQ test above 99.9%, usually above 145 on WISC tests). These kids cannot function in a normal classroom, general ed classroom teachers don’t understand them, they don’t obey, they process information very differently. If they remain in those class they will not thrive academically. The general classroom’s mission is to train future workforce that follow rules and obey society’s standards, and don’t thin on their own. Like most adults today, they get the news and believe it as it is, and never think of the deep implications and meaning, and whom might want you to believe that way. These kids mind don’t work like that they find issues and make things better, the last thing they want to do is learn something and accept it as it is, they test what they learned until it doesn’t work. Human society moves forward because of these type of people that challenge the status quo. When these kids move to a place with similar minds they feel heard and challenged the teacher together, AAP teachers are usually ok with these, half of my older kids’ class are like this, they pack together and challenge the teacher and back each other up. When he was in general ed classroom in 2nd grade, he was the one being yelled at constantly by the teacher, and eventually he told the teacher that she should go back to school instead of teaching.

Disruptive as in taking a classmates project and stomping on it, taking another classmates folder and throwing it across the room or pushing their classmates for fun. Also an AAP classroom is not filled with budding Einsteins! I know because I’ve already had two in this program in a very highly regarded center school. As the PP said, it is mainly a classroom of hard working kids who are ambitious and want to excel but in no way are they all going to challenge the status quo and change the fabric of human society.

Also if your child told their teacher to go back to school instead of teaching, that just reflects on your poor parenting. No matter how academically advanced a child is, disrespect and unkindness should never be tolerated.

I don’t know anything about kids stomping a classmate’s project and throwing homework across the room. But as human beings living in this world, we are all here to learn from each other and to experience, regardless your age, your label (teacher, student, parent). If a teacher is teaching something wrong, and the student is letting her know that, and because of her ego, she yells at the student to shut up, maybe she shouldn’t be a teacher, a teacher should be humble enough to learn from a student too. Like like us parents should be constantly learning from our children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

Yup. People point this out regularly, but it doesn't seem to matter. AAP does go into a bit more depth. Advanced Math is good but not enough for kids who are strong at math. AAP classes have kids who are disruptive in them, there are kids with ADHD and other issues who are very smart and capable but who have the impulse control issues and emotional regulation issues that come with ADHD.

And there are plenty of smart kids who could care less about school and don't apply themselves, regardless of how strong a teacher they have. You can be smart and not curious. You can be smart and do the work easily enough and not care to push yourself.

There are plenty of above average kids who are curious and push themselves and do well in a program like AAP. It is a challenge for those students, and that is a good thing.

AAP is nice to have but it isn't a gifted program, it really doesn't meet the needs of the kids who are in the 99th percentile and curious.

I’m an educator and title of “gifted” is given away much too frequently. Every other parent walks in saying their kid is “gifted.” I certainly don’t see that gifted behavior in my classroom! Gifted kids are still writing two sentences instead of a full story. Smart hard working kids, are however, completing things, asking questions etc. Frankly I prefer the latter.

Also, I have a middle schooler who is a very smart kid in AAP. I wouldn’t say he’s gifted. He’s very bright and works hard and does way better than the so called gifted.

Fully agreed. I went to a TJ kind of school and in my year there was one girl who was truly gifted. Everyone was very very smart and hardworking, went to best universities etc etc but she was just something else. Very humble, introverted, would never interrupt class or talk without being asked, but she just operated on another level in math. AAP is not about serving this kind of talent, it’s a much broader group.

There really isn't enough of the kind of genius you describe to ever actually create a whole classroom of peers for them until maybe when you get to the PhD level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

define disruptive. If you are referring to Defiant, argumentative, and constantly correct teachers and telling teachers a more efficient way, making passive aggressive jokes and emotional outbursts when not heard, that’s not disruptive, that’s an exceptionally gifted mind at play ( IQ test above 99.9%, usually above 145 on WISC tests). These kids cannot function in a normal classroom, general ed classroom teachers don’t understand them, they don’t obey, they process information very differently. If they remain in those class they will not thrive academically. The general classroom’s mission is to train future workforce that follow rules and obey society’s standards, and don’t thin on their own. Like most adults today, they get the news and believe it as it is, and never think of the deep implications and meaning, and whom might want you to believe that way. These kids mind don’t work like that they find issues and make things better, the last thing they want to do is learn something and accept it as it is, they test what they learned until it doesn’t work. Human society moves forward because of these type of people that challenge the status quo. When these kids move to a place with similar minds they feel heard and challenged the teacher together, AAP teachers are usually ok with these, half of my older kids’ class are like this, they pack together and challenge the teacher and back each other up. When he was in general ed classroom in 2nd grade, he was the one being yelled at constantly by the teacher, and eventually he told the teacher that she should go back to school instead of teaching.

Disruptive as in taking a classmates project and stomping on it, taking another classmates folder and throwing it across the room or pushing their classmates for fun. Also an AAP classroom is not filled with budding Einsteins! I know because I’ve already had two in this program in a very highly regarded center school. As the PP said, it is mainly a classroom of hard working kids who are ambitious and want to excel but in no way are they all going to challenge the status quo and change the fabric of human society.

Also if your child told their teacher to go back to school instead of teaching, that just reflects on your poor parenting. No matter how academically advanced a child is, disrespect and unkindness should never be tolerated.

I don’t know anything about kids stomping a classmate’s project and throwing homework across the room. But as human beings living in this world, we are all here to learn from each other and to experience, regardless your age, your label (teacher, student, parent). If a teacher is teaching something wrong, and the student is letting her know that, and because of her ego, she yells at the student to shut up, maybe she shouldn’t be a teacher, a teacher should be humble enough to learn from a student too. Like like us parents should be constantly learning from our children.

And your child should be humble enough to not yell at an adult and learn to follow the classroom rules. If you don’t like the classroom setting try homeschooling. Your thinking is so weird and odd! All the best to your little Newton/Einstein! Can’t wait till they figure out a way to populate life on Mars while yelling at their teachers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

Yup. People point this out regularly, but it doesn't seem to matter. AAP does go into a bit more depth. Advanced Math is good but not enough for kids who are strong at math. AAP classes have kids who are disruptive in them, there are kids with ADHD and other issues who are very smart and capable but who have the impulse control issues and emotional regulation issues that come with ADHD.

And there are plenty of smart kids who could care less about school and don't apply themselves, regardless of how strong a teacher they have. You can be smart and not curious. You can be smart and do the work easily enough and not care to push yourself.

There are plenty of above average kids who are curious and push themselves and do well in a program like AAP. It is a challenge for those students, and that is a good thing.

AAP is nice to have but it isn't a gifted program, it really doesn't meet the needs of the kids who are in the 99th percentile and curious.

I’m an educator and title of “gifted” is given away much too frequently. Every other parent walks in saying their kid is “gifted.” I certainly don’t see that gifted behavior in my classroom! Gifted kids are still writing two sentences instead of a full story. Smart hard working kids, are however, completing things, asking questions etc. Frankly I prefer the latter.

Also, I have a middle schooler who is a very smart kid in AAP. I wouldn’t say he’s gifted. He’s very bright and works hard and does way better than the so called gifted.

Fully agreed. I went to a TJ kind of school and in my year there was one girl who was truly gifted. Everyone was very very smart and hardworking, went to best universities etc etc but she was just something else. Very humble, introverted, would never interrupt class or talk without being asked, but she just operated on another level in math. AAP is not about serving this kind of talent, it’s a much broader group.

I went to a similar school and we had one kid like that. You wouldn't know it. He ended up accomplishing something very big at a young age, then switching fields and again accomplishing something very big.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

define disruptive. If you are referring to Defiant, argumentative, and constantly correct teachers and telling teachers a more efficient way, making passive aggressive jokes and emotional outbursts when not heard, that’s not disruptive, that’s an exceptionally gifted mind at play ( IQ test above 99.9%, usually above 145 on WISC tests). These kids cannot function in a normal classroom, general ed classroom teachers don’t understand them, they don’t obey, they process information very differently. If they remain in those class they will not thrive academically. The general classroom’s mission is to train future workforce that follow rules and obey society’s standards, and don’t thin on their own. Like most adults today, they get the news and believe it as it is, and never think of the deep implications and meaning, and whom might want you to believe that way. These kids mind don’t work like that they find issues and make things better, the last thing they want to do is learn something and accept it as it is, they test what they learned until it doesn’t work. Human society moves forward because of these type of people that challenge the status quo. When these kids move to a place with similar minds they feel heard and challenged the teacher together, AAP teachers are usually ok with these, half of my older kids’ class are like this, they pack together and challenge the teacher and back each other up. When he was in general ed classroom in 2nd grade, he was the one being yelled at constantly by the teacher, and eventually he told the teacher that she should go back to school instead of teaching.

The gifted children on the scale that you describe cannot and have never been educated in a group setting. They require individual tutoring. Luckily, there are very few of these.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

Yup. People point this out regularly, but it doesn't seem to matter. AAP does go into a bit more depth. Advanced Math is good but not enough for kids who are strong at math. AAP classes have kids who are disruptive in them, there are kids with ADHD and other issues who are very smart and capable but who have the impulse control issues and emotional regulation issues that come with ADHD.

And there are plenty of smart kids who could care less about school and don't apply themselves, regardless of how strong a teacher they have. You can be smart and not curious. You can be smart and do the work easily enough and not care to push yourself.

There are plenty of above average kids who are curious and push themselves and do well in a program like AAP. It is a challenge for those students, and that is a good thing.

AAP is nice to have but it isn't a gifted program, it really doesn't meet the needs of the kids who are in the 99th percentile and curious.

I’m an educator and title of “gifted” is given away much too frequently. Every other parent walks in saying their kid is “gifted.” I certainly don’t see that gifted behavior in my classroom! Gifted kids are still writing two sentences instead of a full story. Smart hard working kids, are however, completing things, asking questions etc. Frankly I prefer the latter.

Also, I have a middle schooler who is a very smart kid in AAP. I wouldn’t say he’s gifted. He’s very bright and works hard and does way better than the so called gifted.

Fully agreed. I went to a TJ kind of school and in my year there was one girl who was truly gifted. Everyone was very very smart and hardworking, went to best universities etc etc but she was just something else. Very humble, introverted, would never interrupt class or talk without being asked, but she just operated on another level in math. AAP is not about serving this kind of talent, it’s a much broader group.

There really isn't enough of the kind of genius you describe to ever actually create a whole classroom of peers for them until maybe when you get to the PhD level.

100% and I’m not advocating for that. Just commenting on gifted vs advanced. There is no perfect generic cut off, there are outliers like that, naturally super smart kids, very smart kids who have the drive and motivation to push themselves, etc etc and each group benefits from their own way of instruction. There are so many ways to be happy and successful in every range of the score, and it’s hard to create a system to support them all..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With such a high cut off, I’m not really seeing it reflected in the AAP classroom instructions. The curriculum in language arts, social studies and science is not advanced at all and they just have a few more projects I believe. Math is advanced but only picks up speed in the middle of the 4th grade. I have two kids already in AAP and I’m not that impressed by the curriculum. It’s basically the same and for my younger one the cohort actually has a few very disruptive kids in their class which undermines the peer argument.

define disruptive. If you are referring to Defiant, argumentative, and constantly correct teachers and telling teachers a more efficient way, making passive aggressive jokes and emotional outbursts when not heard, that’s not disruptive, that’s an exceptionally gifted mind at play ( IQ test above 99.9%, usually above 145 on WISC tests). These kids cannot function in a normal classroom, general ed classroom teachers don’t understand them, they don’t obey, they process information very differently. If they remain in those class they will not thrive academically. The general classroom’s mission is to train future workforce that follow rules and obey society’s standards, and don’t thin on their own. Like most adults today, they get the news and believe it as it is, and never think of the deep implications and meaning, and whom might want you to believe that way. These kids mind don’t work like that they find issues and make things better, the last thing they want to do is learn something and accept it as it is, they test what they learned until it doesn’t work. Human society moves forward because of these type of people that challenge the status quo. When these kids move to a place with similar minds they feel heard and challenged the teacher together, AAP teachers are usually ok with these, half of my older kids’ class are like this, they pack together and challenge the teacher and back each other up. When he was in general ed classroom in 2nd grade, he was the one being yelled at constantly by the teacher, and eventually he told the teacher that she should go back to school instead of teaching.

Disruptive as in taking a classmates project and stomping on it, taking another classmates folder and throwing it across the room or pushing their classmates for fun. Also an AAP classroom is not filled with budding Einsteins! I know because I’ve already had two in this program in a very highly regarded center school. As the PP said, it is mainly a classroom of hard working kids who are ambitious and want to excel but in no way are they all going to challenge the status quo and change the fabric of human society.

Also if your child told their teacher to go back to school instead of teaching, that just reflects on your poor parenting. No matter how academically advanced a child is, disrespect and unkindness should never be tolerated.

Thank you! Exactly! Every gift, labeled as gifted or not, needs to follow RULES. You can certainly let the teacher know you disagree in a polite form with questions… NOT disruption! There are no 7-8 year olds who should already have the tag of “world changing.”

Also if you haven’t noticed, kids change and mature EVERY year as does their concentration. There are teens who were “gifted” who are struggling in high school because well, teens, and oh… parents who pushed too hard for TJ and TJ prep and they are drowning.

There is a WHOLE lot more to success than being in AAP in 3rd grade. Otherwise only kids from Fairfax would be in Ivy’s. The rest of the country starts AP in high school. We have turned this city into some weird competitive college town with the parents being the competitors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Totally fair. Someone did post a url that had a PowerPoint that made it seem like the distribution was 100 with a std dev of 15 or 16, but it was not a bastion of clarity.

Immaterial now, but in case anyone is keeping track for future years, 139 on NGAT was not a universal screener score for my kid.

I'm the PP who posted the link. Assuming the sample report in the slide describes the same set of 3 tests that FCPS 2nd graders took, it seems clear to me that total standard score as well as the 3 individual standard scores are based on the same normal distribution with mean 100 and sd 15. Note that the percentile is given for total score in that sample report. Disclaimer is that I have no way of being certain that it is indeed the same scoring and sample that generated FCPS results.

So total score 130+ likely still means the student's total of 3 tests is better than 2sd above national average. A plausible guess is that the individual total score just sums the 3 raw scores (none of which are known to us) and then was mapped to the national sample distribution of such raw score totals.

Regardless, it is surprising that 139 total score wasn't enough to be in top 10% within that school. In statistical sense, a small (=high sampling error) AND very selective (=high sampling bias) sample can still make that happen.

My understanding is that that slide was for a version where the total score is also maxed at 160. Apparently there are two ways to combine, one maxed at 160 and the other at 175.

Regardless, 139 not making the cut seems statistically unlikely, but likely better explained by a model with a higher standard deviation?