My kid got rejected with 99th percentile Cogat

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ > Ivy > rejected for AAP. We appealed and won. The schools want some low key obedient kids in the slow classes. They are also prejudiced against siblings and twins.

I think this is the explanation for some of the rejected kids with high scores. They want to keep some of the gifted kids in gen ed and they look for the "best" well-behaved successful ones for this (not my "bored, disruptive" gifted kid). The rest of this post is gobbledygook.

This doesn’t make any sense. Are posters just making this up or is it at least from some source?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This doesn’t make any sense. Are posters just making this up or is it at least from some source?

It's all conjecture. Most of us haven't been on any AAP selection panels, and don't know what they're really looking for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ > Ivy > rejected for AAP. We appealed and won. The schools want some low key obedient kids in the slow classes. They are also prejudiced against siblings and twins.

I think this is the explanation for some of the rejected kids with high scores. They want to keep some of the gifted kids in gen ed and they look for the "best" well-behaved successful ones for this (not my "bored, disruptive" gifted kid). The rest of this post is gobbledygook.

This doesn’t make any sense. Are posters just making this up or is it at least from some source?

I am sure that is pure speculation, perhaps with a bit of sour grapes. It doesn’t make sense and honestly “obedient kids” are not necessarily the ones thinking out of the box which is more what AAP is about. I kinda laugh at the idea of turning work samples into another standardized test of sorts. Exactly contrary to the whole point of work samples!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am sure that is pure speculation, perhaps with a bit of sour grapes. It doesn’t make sense and honestly “obedient kids” are not necessarily the ones thinking out of the box which is more what AAP is about. I kinda laugh at the idea of turning work samples into another standardized test of sorts. Exactly contrary to the whole point of work samples!

I'm sure it's possible to give kids open ended prompts, and let them take it where they may. That way, there is more of an apples to apples comparison of the work kids are capable of producing, from the same starting point.

[Anonymous]

I think people are trying to impose some kind of logical framework to the admissions decisions and since some of them don’t make sense, logically, then there must be some “secret” criteria.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am sure that is pure speculation, perhaps with a bit of sour grapes. It doesn’t make sense and honestly “obedient kids” are not necessarily the ones thinking out of the box which is more what AAP is about. I kinda laugh at the idea of turning work samples into another standardized test of sorts. Exactly contrary to the whole point of work samples!

I'm sure it's possible to give kids open ended prompts, and let them take it where they may. That way, there is more of an apples to apples comparison of the work kids are capable of producing, from the same starting point.

This is the way they do work samples at my kid's ES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am sure that is pure speculation, perhaps with a bit of sour grapes. It doesn’t make sense and honestly “obedient kids” are not necessarily the ones thinking out of the box which is more what AAP is about. I kinda laugh at the idea of turning work samples into another standardized test of sorts. Exactly contrary to the whole point of work samples!

I'm sure it's possible to give kids open ended prompts, and let them take it where they may. That way, there is more of an apples to apples comparison of the work kids are capable of producing, from the same starting point.

I guess agree to disagree. I don’t think the point of work samples is to show what kids are capable of producing from the same starting point. That is what testing does, more or less since “same starting point” is maybe subjective but would be equally subjective for anything. Work samples are not limited to only work done in school so parents who are not happy with school work are free to provide work samples. I think they are great to show what testing does not show - what is unique about your kid or instances of their individual talents really shining or some really creayive thinking outside the box. Things that should be considered in the process but aren’t shown through standardized testing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:TJ > Ivy > rejected for AAP. We appealed and won. The schools want some low key obedient kids in the slow classes. They are also prejudiced against siblings and twins.

That could explain low GBRS given out by the local school for kids with high test scores who are above grade level in all metrics, but not the mysterious rejections by the central committee. Local schools have been accused of hoarding bright URM students so as to have a smaller achievement gap. I wouldn't be surprised if local schools also want to keep the well behaved kids. They certainly have no reason to lowball the GBRS for kids who are difficult to teach or have PITA parents, since it would be better for them to make those kids someone else's problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am sure that is pure speculation, perhaps with a bit of sour grapes. It doesn’t make sense and honestly “obedient kids” are not necessarily the ones thinking out of the box which is more what AAP is about. I kinda laugh at the idea of turning work samples into another standardized test of sorts. Exactly contrary to the whole point of work samples!

I'm sure it's possible to give kids open ended prompts, and let them take it where they may. That way, there is more of an apples to apples comparison of the work kids are capable of producing, from the same starting point.

I guess agree to disagree. I don’t think the point of work samples is to show what kids are capable of producing from the same starting point. That is what testing does, more or less since “same starting point” is maybe subjective but would be equally subjective for anything. Work samples are not limited to only work done in school so parents who are not happy with school work are free to provide work samples. I think they are great to show what testing does not show - what is unique about your kid or instances of their individual talents really shining or some really creayive thinking outside the box. Things that should be considered in the process but aren’t shown through standardized testing.

But how can you determine to what degree the work sample is the kid's work and to what degree the teacher or parents helped? Some of the things being submitted have gone through rounds of revision in the classroom and can't fairly be compared with something that is 100% the student's own work. Unless there's some sort of guidelines to how the work samples are produced and chosen by the schools, they're just another meaningless metric.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am sure that is pure speculation, perhaps with a bit of sour grapes. It doesn’t make sense and honestly “obedient kids” are not necessarily the ones thinking out of the box which is more what AAP is about. I kinda laugh at the idea of turning work samples into another standardized test of sorts. Exactly contrary to the whole point of work samples!

I'm sure it's possible to give kids open ended prompts, and let them take it where they may. That way, there is more of an apples to apples comparison of the work kids are capable of producing, from the same starting point.

I guess agree to disagree. I don’t think the point of work samples is to show what kids are capable of producing from the same starting point. That is what testing does, more or less since “same starting point” is maybe subjective but would be equally subjective for anything. Work samples are not limited to only work done in school so parents who are not happy with school work are free to provide work samples. I think they are great to show what testing does not show - what is unique about your kid or instances of their individual talents really shining or some really creayive thinking outside the box. Things that should be considered in the process but aren’t shown through standardized testing.

But how can you determine to what degree the work sample is the kid's work and to what degree the teacher or parents helped? Some of the things being submitted have gone through rounds of revision in the classroom and can't fairly be compared with something that is 100% the student's own work. Unless there's some sort of guidelines to how the work samples are produced and chosen by the schools, they're just another meaningless metric.

Op here. Well my child’s work was 100% his work and it apparently wasn’t good enough. There were spelling errors and run on sentences. In hindsight, I wish I could have edited his work and gave some suggestions to look more outside the box thinking.

We will work on a few work samples over spring break.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess agree to disagree. I don’t think the point of work samples is to show what kids are capable of producing from the same starting point. That is what testing does, more or less since “same starting point” is maybe subjective but would be equally subjective for anything. Work samples are not limited to only work done in school so parents who are not happy with school work are free to provide work samples. I think they are great to show what testing does not show - what is unique about your kid or instances of their individual talents really shining or some really creayive thinking outside the box. Things that should be considered in the process but aren’t shown through standardized testing.

But how can you determine to what degree the work sample is the kid's work and to what degree the teacher or parents helped? Some of the things being submitted have gone through rounds of revision in the classroom and can't fairly be compared with something that is 100% the student's own work. Unless there's some sort of guidelines to how the work samples are produced and chosen by the schools, they're just another meaningless metric.

Have you spent much time in an FCPS second grade classroom? I volunteer regularly. Speaking from our ES, the teacher definitely does not have the time or inclination to help students manufacture AAP work samples! The idea is laughable. And I think it is reasonable to guess that is the case at more than just our school. Parents - maybe. Honestly even if work samples were turned inti another round of standardized testing, people still wiuldn’t be happy and would question the process and call it meaningless.

[Anonymous]

You can ask for a retest in your school building. Or better yet, go to GMU for testing. And for AAP portfolio, try the Young Scholars Circle's Writing Enrichment Program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can ask for a retest in your school building. Or better yet, go to GMU for testing. And for AAP portfolio, try the Young Scholars Circle's Writing Enrichment Program.

Oh, a shill! Do your staff clear their test prep moonlighting with LCPS and FCPS?

[Anonymous]

For those appealing, would you include the print-out of the test scores to show the percentiles? I know this is not "new" information but on the original application they only see the scores but not the percentile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those appealing, would you include the print-out of the test scores to show the percentiles? I know this is not "new" information but on the original application they only see the scores but not the percentile.

No, I think that would make you seem annoying.