AAP Results and Discussion 2025

[Anonymous]

My 4th grader got in. I wonder if waiting until later in the game helped because her scores were a bit lower than many of these seem to be. On the flip side she's had more years of scores to look at and has been in part time AAP for awhile as well. I don't have a copy of her packet to see what the HOPE looked like. We are deferring until middle school, but I'm a bit nervous she will be far behind the kids that have been in full time AAP for years. We just wanted to give her the ability to make choices down the line. Does middle school full time AAP feed into a high school program?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My 4th grader got in. I wonder if waiting until later in the game helped because her scores were a bit lower than many of these seem to be. On the flip side she's had more years of scores to look at and has been in part time AAP for awhile as well. I don't have a copy of her packet to see what the HOPE looked like. We are deferring until middle school, but I'm a bit nervous she will be far behind the kids that have been in full time AAP for years. We just wanted to give her the ability to make choices down the line. Does middle school full time AAP feed into a high school program?

We deferred until MS and DS has been fine. I would make sure she is taking Advanced Math at her base school.

AAP ends in 8th grade. In HS kids can take Honors and AP/IB classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. I'm laughing at the idea that FCPS needs to guess which kids might have been prepped and misuse a teacher profile tool (HOPE) to keep them out of AAP.

Kids who are prepped have involved parents who value academics. They're going to be the ones in enrichment classes. If they struggle, the parents will get tutors. They can handle the program just fine.

Since AAP is at best a mildly accelerated program, it should be available for any kid who can handle it. That would include the kids with high scores on the CogAT or NNAT, prepped or otherwise. It would also include kids with high iready scores, whether or not they're in enrichment. And it should include the kids that the teachers think belong. There's no reason to restrict access.

Keep rationalizing your craziness!

Keep rationalizing your misuse of the HOPE scale. The NAGC documentation provided earlier in this thread and again here says:
"In other words, some students scored high on the achievement measure, but did not receive high teacher ratings on the HOPE Scale. Perhaps such students have negative behaviors, and they may be at risk of underachievement and not being placed in a program if the program requires high scores and teacher recommendations. We believe that their high scores on either measure should result in placement."
https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

In the same paper, they advocate using HOPE for inclusion rather than exclusion, meaning HOPE should be used to lift kids into AAP who otherwise don't have the stats. It's not intended to keep kids out who do.

The HOPE scale was never designed to detect possible test preppers or exclude kids from receiving gifted services who otherwise seem to have the stats. It's purely a tool to lift kids into programs like AAP who show potential and who might have otherwise been overlooked.

I never said it was used to detect test preppers WTF. You must be talking to someone else from upthread.

The HOPE and other variables are increasingly considered in order to have a comprehensive picture of the kid. In an ideal world, test scores would suffice and would be reliable because people would not be enrolling in ACTUAL COURSES to improve their kids probably pathetic pre-prep test scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually prep my kid on cogat many times. I don't see significant improvements...very frustrated

Most people will tell you prepping can only twiddle around the edges of the score. It might help a nervous kid who shuts down if they don't immediately understand a question (which is per our favorite AAP-qualified 3rd grade teacher a very typical profile for an AAP kid), but it won't actually make your kid smarter. So it won't move the needle much.

You must be one of these people who actually has ethics because you do not realize just how extensive the prep is. I would agree that completing one book with a couple of tests is not going to move the needle much, but a 12+ hour course will. And right, of course it won't make the kid smarter.

The fervent defenses of test prep on here are crazy but it is human nature to rationalize bad behavior.

For the record, I did a couple of tests in a book with my dc and that was enough for both of us. DC might have avoided making some silly mistakes because of it but that's about it. Dc's scores were solid (would have gotten DC in under old system w/o local norms) but not out of this world but because everything else lined up (great I-Readys, VAALLSS, report cards, respectable HOPE and solid work examples), DC got in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. I'm laughing at the idea that FCPS needs to guess which kids might have been prepped and misuse a teacher profile tool (HOPE) to keep them out of AAP.

Kids who are prepped have involved parents who value academics. They're going to be the ones in enrichment classes. If they struggle, the parents will get tutors. They can handle the program just fine.

Since AAP is at best a mildly accelerated program, it should be available for any kid who can handle it. That would include the kids with high scores on the CogAT or NNAT, prepped or otherwise. It would also include kids with high iready scores, whether or not they're in enrichment. And it should include the kids that the teachers think belong. There's no reason to restrict access.

Keep rationalizing your craziness!

Keep rationalizing your misuse of the HOPE scale. The NAGC documentation provided earlier in this thread and again here says:
"In other words, some students scored high on the achievement measure, but did not receive high teacher ratings on the HOPE Scale. Perhaps such students have negative behaviors, and they may be at risk of underachievement and not being placed in a program if the program requires high scores and teacher recommendations. We believe that their high scores on either measure should result in placement."
https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

In the same paper, they advocate using HOPE for inclusion rather than exclusion, meaning HOPE should be used to lift kids into AAP who otherwise don't have the stats. It's not intended to keep kids out who do.

The HOPE scale was never designed to detect possible test preppers or exclude kids from receiving gifted services who otherwise seem to have the stats. It's purely a tool to lift kids into programs like AAP who show potential and who might have otherwise been overlooked.

I never said it was used to detect test preppers WTF. You must be talking to someone else from upthread.

The HOPE and other variables are increasingly considered in order to have a comprehensive picture of the kid. In an ideal world, test scores would suffice and would be reliable because people would not be enrolling in ACTUAL COURSES to improve their kids probably pathetic pre-prep test scores.

You're living in fantasy lala land if you think there are people extensively prepping their kids for CogAT but not also putting them in pretty hardcore academic enrichment programs. The kids who are heavily prepped for CogAT are also going to have high iready scores and will likely be favorably viewed by their teachers. Those kids are absolutely getting admitted to AAP. The kids with high CogAT scores and much lower achievement scores or ability scores are usually the ones with undiagnosed LDs or with minimal parental support at home. While I'm not sure that AAP in its current form is the right placement for kids with high CogAT and lower achievement, some sort of intervention is indicated.

For the most part, the prepped kids that I know still didn't have especially high CogAT scores, but were above grade level in reading and were given perfect GBRS scores. It's almost a FCPS trope that if you see a kid who is UMC, above grade level in reading but not drastically so, does pretty work, is eager to please the teacher/do more worksheets, is a "pleasure to have in class," and gets around a 120-130 CogAT score, the kid is at best a somewhat above average, heavily enriched kid.

None of this justifies FCPS' use of HOPE to exclude kids who have 98th percentile+ (heck, even 95th percentile+) scores in both CogAT and iready.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. I'm laughing at the idea that FCPS needs to guess which kids might have been prepped and misuse a teacher profile tool (HOPE) to keep them out of AAP.

Kids who are prepped have involved parents who value academics. They're going to be the ones in enrichment classes. If they struggle, the parents will get tutors. They can handle the program just fine.

Since AAP is at best a mildly accelerated program, it should be available for any kid who can handle it. That would include the kids with high scores on the CogAT or NNAT, prepped or otherwise. It would also include kids with high iready scores, whether or not they're in enrichment. And it should include the kids that the teachers think belong. There's no reason to restrict access.

Keep rationalizing your craziness!

Keep rationalizing your misuse of the HOPE scale. The NAGC documentation provided earlier in this thread and again here says:
"In other words, some students scored high on the achievement measure, but did not receive high teacher ratings on the HOPE Scale. Perhaps such students have negative behaviors, and they may be at risk of underachievement and not being placed in a program if the program requires high scores and teacher recommendations. We believe that their high scores on either measure should result in placement."
https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

In the same paper, they advocate using HOPE for inclusion rather than exclusion, meaning HOPE should be used to lift kids into AAP who otherwise don't have the stats. It's not intended to keep kids out who do.

The HOPE scale was never designed to detect possible test preppers or exclude kids from receiving gifted services who otherwise seem to have the stats. It's purely a tool to lift kids into programs like AAP who show potential and who might have otherwise been overlooked.

I never said it was used to detect test preppers WTF. You must be talking to someone else from upthread.

The HOPE and other variables are increasingly considered in order to have a comprehensive picture of the kid. In an ideal world, test scores would suffice and would be reliable because people would not be enrolling in ACTUAL COURSES to improve their kids probably pathetic pre-prep test scores.

You're living in fantasy lala land if you think there are people extensively prepping their kids for CogAT but not also putting them in pretty hardcore academic enrichment programs. The kids who are heavily prepped for CogAT are also going to have high iready scores and will likely be favorably viewed by their teachers. Those kids are absolutely getting admitted to AAP. The kids with high CogAT scores and much lower achievement scores or ability scores are usually the ones with undiagnosed LDs or with minimal parental support at home. While I'm not sure that AAP in its current form is the right placement for kids with high CogAT and lower achievement, some sort of intervention is indicated.

For the most part, the prepped kids that I know still didn't have especially high CogAT scores, but were above grade level in reading and were given perfect GBRS scores. It's almost a FCPS trope that if you see a kid who is UMC, above grade level in reading but not drastically so, does pretty work, is eager to please the teacher/do more worksheets, is a "pleasure to have in class," and gets around a 120-130 CogAT score, the kid is at best a somewhat above average, heavily enriched kid.

None of this justifies FCPS' use of HOPE to exclude kids who have 98th percentile+ (heck, even 95th percentile+) scores in both CogAT and iready.

If a child is heavily enriched there is no need to complete a course to prep for the CoGAT. We are talking about a certain cohort of mostly east asian families who do not necessarily have funds or background for heavy enrichment but can pay up for CogAT prep classes.

95th percentile on I-Ready isn't actually that good in this area.

My guess is a lot of the kids who are heavily prepped and do not get in actually are not great readers and don't have much creativity and intellectual intensity, hence the low HOPE ratings.

To me, if a kid gets enrichment at home and in activities and scores respectably on tests without much if any prep, there is no question they belong in AAP. If a kid is getting prepped and this doesn't reflect their actual abilities, as evidenced by uneven presentation across the various indices, that tells me they are cheating and should just do advanced math or something.

[Anonymous]

My guess is that you're creating some sort of strawman about parents who care so much about AAP that they'll heavily prep for CogAT, but so little about making sure their kids are advanced in reading and math. It's not really a thing. Most of the hardcore CogAT preppers also have their kids in kumon / mathnasium / chinese school /AoPS /etc. They're going to have reasonably high iready scores, too.

There are a lot of reasons why a 2nd grader might have an uneven profile. You're pretty determined to glom onto "cheating" as the reason, even though it's probably the least likely one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. I'm laughing at the idea that FCPS needs to guess which kids might have been prepped and misuse a teacher profile tool (HOPE) to keep them out of AAP.

Kids who are prepped have involved parents who value academics. They're going to be the ones in enrichment classes. If they struggle, the parents will get tutors. They can handle the program just fine.

Since AAP is at best a mildly accelerated program, it should be available for any kid who can handle it. That would include the kids with high scores on the CogAT or NNAT, prepped or otherwise. It would also include kids with high iready scores, whether or not they're in enrichment. And it should include the kids that the teachers think belong. There's no reason to restrict access.

Keep rationalizing your craziness!

Keep rationalizing your misuse of the HOPE scale. The NAGC documentation provided earlier in this thread and again here says:
"In other words, some students scored high on the achievement measure, but did not receive high teacher ratings on the HOPE Scale. Perhaps such students have negative behaviors, and they may be at risk of underachievement and not being placed in a program if the program requires high scores and teacher recommendations. We believe that their high scores on either measure should result in placement."
https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

In the same paper, they advocate using HOPE for inclusion rather than exclusion, meaning HOPE should be used to lift kids into AAP who otherwise don't have the stats. It's not intended to keep kids out who do.

The HOPE scale was never designed to detect possible test preppers or exclude kids from receiving gifted services who otherwise seem to have the stats. It's purely a tool to lift kids into programs like AAP who show potential and who might have otherwise been overlooked.

I never said it was used to detect test preppers WTF. You must be talking to someone else from upthread.

The HOPE and other variables are increasingly considered in order to have a comprehensive picture of the kid. In an ideal world, test scores would suffice and would be reliable because people would not be enrolling in ACTUAL COURSES to improve their kids probably pathetic pre-prep test scores.

You're living in fantasy lala land if you think there are people extensively prepping their kids for CogAT but not also putting them in pretty hardcore academic enrichment programs. The kids who are heavily prepped for CogAT are also going to have high iready scores and will likely be favorably viewed by their teachers. Those kids are absolutely getting admitted to AAP. The kids with high CogAT scores and much lower achievement scores or ability scores are usually the ones with undiagnosed LDs or with minimal parental support at home. While I'm not sure that AAP in its current form is the right placement for kids with high CogAT and lower achievement, some sort of intervention is indicated.

For the most part, the prepped kids that I know still didn't have especially high CogAT scores, but were above grade level in reading and were given perfect GBRS scores. It's almost a FCPS trope that if you see a kid who is UMC, above grade level in reading but not drastically so, does pretty work, is eager to please the teacher/do more worksheets, is a "pleasure to have in class," and gets around a 120-130 CogAT score, the kid is at best a somewhat above average, heavily enriched kid.

None of this justifies FCPS' use of HOPE to exclude kids who have 98th percentile+ (heck, even 95th percentile+) scores in both CogAT and iready.

If a child is heavily enriched there is no need to complete a course to prep for the CoGAT. We are talking about a certain cohort of mostly east asian families who do not necessarily have funds or background for heavy enrichment but can pay up for CogAT prep classes.

95th percentile on I-Ready isn't actually that good in this area.

My guess is a lot of the kids who are heavily prepped and do not get in actually are not great readers and don't have much creativity and intellectual intensity, hence the low HOPE ratings.

To me, if a kid gets enrichment at home and in activities and scores respectably on tests without much if any prep, there is no question they belong in AAP. If a kid is getting prepped and this doesn't reflect their actual abilities, as evidenced by uneven presentation across the various indices, that tells me they are cheating and should just do advanced math or something.

The accusations of test prep and cheating is always against Asians. It is the same for TJ, except for TJ, people often say they are the rich Asians prepping and cheating.

There is a very tiny portion of people sending their kids to cogat class. There isn’t some secret strategy getting these Asian kids into AAP. You aren’t getting a dumb kid to score 150. What is more likely is a kid who may take the test cold and get a 120, may move that score to a 130.

[Anonymous]

Is anyone else still waiting for results? We're in the WSHS pyramid and still don't have anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. I'm laughing at the idea that FCPS needs to guess which kids might have been prepped and misuse a teacher profile tool (HOPE) to keep them out of AAP.

Kids who are prepped have involved parents who value academics. They're going to be the ones in enrichment classes. If they struggle, the parents will get tutors. They can handle the program just fine.

Since AAP is at best a mildly accelerated program, it should be available for any kid who can handle it. That would include the kids with high scores on the CogAT or NNAT, prepped or otherwise. It would also include kids with high iready scores, whether or not they're in enrichment. And it should include the kids that the teachers think belong. There's no reason to restrict access.

Keep rationalizing your craziness!

Keep rationalizing your misuse of the HOPE scale. The NAGC documentation provided earlier in this thread and again here says:
"In other words, some students scored high on the achievement measure, but did not receive high teacher ratings on the HOPE Scale. Perhaps such students have negative behaviors, and they may be at risk of underachievement and not being placed in a program if the program requires high scores and teacher recommendations. We believe that their high scores on either measure should result in placement."
https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

In the same paper, they advocate using HOPE for inclusion rather than exclusion, meaning HOPE should be used to lift kids into AAP who otherwise don't have the stats. It's not intended to keep kids out who do.

The HOPE scale was never designed to detect possible test preppers or exclude kids from receiving gifted services who otherwise seem to have the stats. It's purely a tool to lift kids into programs like AAP who show potential and who might have otherwise been overlooked.

I never said it was used to detect test preppers WTF. You must be talking to someone else from upthread.

The HOPE and other variables are increasingly considered in order to have a comprehensive picture of the kid. In an ideal world, test scores would suffice and would be reliable because people would not be enrolling in ACTUAL COURSES to improve their kids probably pathetic pre-prep test scores.

You're living in fantasy lala land if you think there are people extensively prepping their kids for CogAT but not also putting them in pretty hardcore academic enrichment programs. The kids who are heavily prepped for CogAT are also going to have high iready scores and will likely be favorably viewed by their teachers. Those kids are absolutely getting admitted to AAP. The kids with high CogAT scores and much lower achievement scores or ability scores are usually the ones with undiagnosed LDs or with minimal parental support at home. While I'm not sure that AAP in its current form is the right placement for kids with high CogAT and lower achievement, some sort of intervention is indicated.

For the most part, the prepped kids that I know still didn't have especially high CogAT scores, but were above grade level in reading and were given perfect GBRS scores. It's almost a FCPS trope that if you see a kid who is UMC, above grade level in reading but not drastically so, does pretty work, is eager to please the teacher/do more worksheets, is a "pleasure to have in class," and gets around a 120-130 CogAT score, the kid is at best a somewhat above average, heavily enriched kid.

None of this justifies FCPS' use of HOPE to exclude kids who have 98th percentile+ (heck, even 95th percentile+) scores in both CogAT and iready.

If a child is heavily enriched there is no need to complete a course to prep for the CoGAT. We are talking about a certain cohort of mostly east asian families who do not necessarily have funds or background for heavy enrichment but can pay up for CogAT prep classes.

95th percentile on I-Ready isn't actually that good in this area.

My guess is a lot of the kids who are heavily prepped and do not get in actually are not great readers and don't have much creativity and intellectual intensity, hence the low HOPE ratings.

To me, if a kid gets enrichment at home and in activities and scores respectably on tests without much if any prep, there is no question they belong in AAP. If a kid is getting prepped and this doesn't reflect their actual abilities, as evidenced by uneven presentation across the various indices, that tells me they are cheating and should just do advanced math or something.

The accusations of test prep and cheating is always against Asians. It is the same for TJ, except for TJ, people often say they are the rich Asians prepping and cheating.

There is a very tiny portion of people sending their kids to cogat class. There isn’t some secret strategy getting these Asian kids into AAP. You aren’t getting a dumb kid to score 150. What is more likely is a kid who may take the test cold and get a 120, may move that score to a 130.

You are just making this up to justify your cheating. The classes exist and they fill up, with mostly asian kids. Just look up Sunshine Academy. There's also Testing Mom and the like. The CogAT is a short and not particularly good test. I have no doubt someone with lower reading scores could be prepped to a high score on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone else still waiting for results? We're in the WSHS pyramid and still don't have anything.

Maybe they forgot your packet? Reach out to the AART

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone else still waiting for results? We're in the WSHS pyramid and still don't have anything.

Maybe they forgot your packet? Reach out to the AART

Thanks. That's what I'm wondering. I will likely reach out tomorrow.

[Anonymous]

Current Grade: 2nd
NNAT: 143
CoGAT: 143
In Pool (Yes/No): Yes
iReady Math Percentile: 99th
iReady Reading Percentile: 99th
VALLS: 701 --> 719
HOPE (good/bad/etc, # of exceptional subjects): No idea

Pyramid: McLean

In/not in: In

Is anyone trying to decide between staying at their current school for level IV AAP vs going to the prescribed center school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. I'm laughing at the idea that FCPS needs to guess which kids might have been prepped and misuse a teacher profile tool (HOPE) to keep them out of AAP.

Kids who are prepped have involved parents who value academics. They're going to be the ones in enrichment classes. If they struggle, the parents will get tutors. They can handle the program just fine.

Since AAP is at best a mildly accelerated program, it should be available for any kid who can handle it. That would include the kids with high scores on the CogAT or NNAT, prepped or otherwise. It would also include kids with high iready scores, whether or not they're in enrichment. And it should include the kids that the teachers think belong. There's no reason to restrict access.

Keep rationalizing your craziness!

Keep rationalizing your misuse of the HOPE scale. The NAGC documentation provided earlier in this thread and again here says:
"In other words, some students scored high on the achievement measure, but did not receive high teacher ratings on the HOPE Scale. Perhaps such students have negative behaviors, and they may be at risk of underachievement and not being placed in a program if the program requires high scores and teacher recommendations. We believe that their high scores on either measure should result in placement."
https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

In the same paper, they advocate using HOPE for inclusion rather than exclusion, meaning HOPE should be used to lift kids into AAP who otherwise don't have the stats. It's not intended to keep kids out who do.

The HOPE scale was never designed to detect possible test preppers or exclude kids from receiving gifted services who otherwise seem to have the stats. It's purely a tool to lift kids into programs like AAP who show potential and who might have otherwise been overlooked.

I never said it was used to detect test preppers WTF. You must be talking to someone else from upthread.

The HOPE and other variables are increasingly considered in order to have a comprehensive picture of the kid. In an ideal world, test scores would suffice and would be reliable because people would not be enrolling in ACTUAL COURSES to improve their kids probably pathetic pre-prep test scores.

You're living in fantasy lala land if you think there are people extensively prepping their kids for CogAT but not also putting them in pretty hardcore academic enrichment programs. The kids who are heavily prepped for CogAT are also going to have high iready scores and will likely be favorably viewed by their teachers. Those kids are absolutely getting admitted to AAP. The kids with high CogAT scores and much lower achievement scores or ability scores are usually the ones with undiagnosed LDs or with minimal parental support at home. While I'm not sure that AAP in its current form is the right placement for kids with high CogAT and lower achievement, some sort of intervention is indicated.

For the most part, the prepped kids that I know still didn't have especially high CogAT scores, but were above grade level in reading and were given perfect GBRS scores. It's almost a FCPS trope that if you see a kid who is UMC, above grade level in reading but not drastically so, does pretty work, is eager to please the teacher/do more worksheets, is a "pleasure to have in class," and gets around a 120-130 CogAT score, the kid is at best a somewhat above average, heavily enriched kid.

None of this justifies FCPS' use of HOPE to exclude kids who have 98th percentile+ (heck, even 95th percentile+) scores in both CogAT and iready.

If a child is heavily enriched there is no need to complete a course to prep for the CoGAT. We are talking about a certain cohort of mostly east asian families who do not necessarily have funds or background for heavy enrichment but can pay up for CogAT prep classes.

95th percentile on I-Ready isn't actually that good in this area.

My guess is a lot of the kids who are heavily prepped and do not get in actually are not great readers and don't have much creativity and intellectual intensity, hence the low HOPE ratings.

To me, if a kid gets enrichment at home and in activities and scores respectably on tests without much if any prep, there is no question they belong in AAP. If a kid is getting prepped and this doesn't reflect their actual abilities, as evidenced by uneven presentation across the various indices, that tells me they are cheating and should just do advanced math or something.

The accusations of test prep and cheating is always against Asians. It is the same for TJ, except for TJ, people often say they are the rich Asians prepping and cheating.

There is a very tiny portion of people sending their kids to cogat class. There isn’t some secret strategy getting these Asian kids into AAP. You aren’t getting a dumb kid to score 150. What is more likely is a kid who may take the test cold and get a 120, may move that score to a 130.

You are just making this up to justify your cheating. The classes exist and they fill up, with mostly asian kids. Just look up Sunshine Academy. There's also Testing Mom and the like. The CogAT is a short and not particularly good test. I have no doubt someone with lower reading scores could be prepped to a high score on it.

Cheating implies taking a short cut. But no, sacrifice were made for these kids to test prep.

Test-prep is heavily engrained in East Asian academic culture. For those who grew up in China/HK/Taiwan/Japan/Korea, you'd understand the various institutions (補習班，塾、hagwon, you name it). You won't find it surprising these immigrant families want to set up the best future for their young child by mimicking what worked for them back in their home countries--hence businesses like Sunshine Academy. These kids take classes for 3-5 hours every weekend for academic prep (math, reading, test prep etc.).

On the other hand, they very likely miss out on other activities such as sports, hobbies, hanging out with friends/family, going on hike, etc. To call out this behavior as "cheating" is unfair to these families who are doing the most (and most of the time the only thing they know) to set up their kids for their future.

Yes, you may disagree with this philosophy because you may be depriving the next greatest athlete/artist/cultural engineer, but you need to understand academic is above all in Asian families.

At the end of the day, nobody is gaming the [CoGAT] system, it's the test that is flawed. Until somebody could develop an evaluation that cannot be prepped, this is all fair game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. I'm laughing at the idea that FCPS needs to guess which kids might have been prepped and misuse a teacher profile tool (HOPE) to keep them out of AAP.

Kids who are prepped have involved parents who value academics. They're going to be the ones in enrichment classes. If they struggle, the parents will get tutors. They can handle the program just fine.

Since AAP is at best a mildly accelerated program, it should be available for any kid who can handle it. That would include the kids with high scores on the CogAT or NNAT, prepped or otherwise. It would also include kids with high iready scores, whether or not they're in enrichment. And it should include the kids that the teachers think belong. There's no reason to restrict access.

Keep rationalizing your craziness!

Keep rationalizing your misuse of the HOPE scale. The NAGC documentation provided earlier in this thread and again here says:
"In other words, some students scored high on the achievement measure, but did not receive high teacher ratings on the HOPE Scale. Perhaps such students have negative behaviors, and they may be at risk of underachievement and not being placed in a program if the program requires high scores and teacher recommendations. We believe that their high scores on either measure should result in placement."
https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

In the same paper, they advocate using HOPE for inclusion rather than exclusion, meaning HOPE should be used to lift kids into AAP who otherwise don't have the stats. It's not intended to keep kids out who do.

The HOPE scale was never designed to detect possible test preppers or exclude kids from receiving gifted services who otherwise seem to have the stats. It's purely a tool to lift kids into programs like AAP who show potential and who might have otherwise been overlooked.

I never said it was used to detect test preppers WTF. You must be talking to someone else from upthread.

The HOPE and other variables are increasingly considered in order to have a comprehensive picture of the kid. In an ideal world, test scores would suffice and would be reliable because people would not be enrolling in ACTUAL COURSES to improve their kids probably pathetic pre-prep test scores.

You're living in fantasy lala land if you think there are people extensively prepping their kids for CogAT but not also putting them in pretty hardcore academic enrichment programs. The kids who are heavily prepped for CogAT are also going to have high iready scores and will likely be favorably viewed by their teachers. Those kids are absolutely getting admitted to AAP. The kids with high CogAT scores and much lower achievement scores or ability scores are usually the ones with undiagnosed LDs or with minimal parental support at home. While I'm not sure that AAP in its current form is the right placement for kids with high CogAT and lower achievement, some sort of intervention is indicated.

For the most part, the prepped kids that I know still didn't have especially high CogAT scores, but were above grade level in reading and were given perfect GBRS scores. It's almost a FCPS trope that if you see a kid who is UMC, above grade level in reading but not drastically so, does pretty work, is eager to please the teacher/do more worksheets, is a "pleasure to have in class," and gets around a 120-130 CogAT score, the kid is at best a somewhat above average, heavily enriched kid.

None of this justifies FCPS' use of HOPE to exclude kids who have 98th percentile+ (heck, even 95th percentile+) scores in both CogAT and iready.

If a child is heavily enriched there is no need to complete a course to prep for the CoGAT. We are talking about a certain cohort of mostly east asian families who do not necessarily have funds or background for heavy enrichment but can pay up for CogAT prep classes.

95th percentile on I-Ready isn't actually that good in this area.

My guess is a lot of the kids who are heavily prepped and do not get in actually are not great readers and don't have much creativity and intellectual intensity, hence the low HOPE ratings.

To me, if a kid gets enrichment at home and in activities and scores respectably on tests without much if any prep, there is no question they belong in AAP. If a kid is getting prepped and this doesn't reflect their actual abilities, as evidenced by uneven presentation across the various indices, that tells me they are cheating and should just do advanced math or something.

The accusations of test prep and cheating is always against Asians. It is the same for TJ, except for TJ, people often say they are the rich Asians prepping and cheating.

There is a very tiny portion of people sending their kids to cogat class. There isn’t some secret strategy getting these Asian kids into AAP. You aren’t getting a dumb kid to score 150. What is more likely is a kid who may take the test cold and get a 120, may move that score to a 130.

You are just making this up to justify your cheating. The classes exist and they fill up, with mostly asian kids. Just look up Sunshine Academy. There's also Testing Mom and the like. The CogAT is a short and not particularly good test. I have no doubt someone with lower reading scores could be prepped to a high score on it.

Cheating implies taking a short cut. But no, sacrifice were made for these kids to test prep.

Test-prep is heavily engrained in East Asian academic culture. For those who grew up in China/HK/Taiwan/Japan/Korea, you'd understand the various institutions (補習班，塾、hagwon, you name it). You won't find it surprising these immigrant families want to set up the best future for their young child by mimicking what worked for them back in their home countries--hence businesses like Sunshine Academy. These kids take classes for 3-5 hours every weekend for academic prep (math, reading, test prep etc.).

On the other hand, they very likely miss out on other activities such as sports, hobbies, hanging out with friends/family, going on hike, etc. To call out this behavior as "cheating" is unfair to these families who are doing the most (and most of the time the only thing they know) to set up their kids for their future.

Yes, you may disagree with this philosophy because you may be depriving the next greatest athlete/artist/cultural engineer, but you need to understand academic is above all in Asian families.

At the end of the day, nobody is gaming the [CoGAT] system, it's the test that is flawed. Until somebody could develop an evaluation that cannot be prepped, this is all fair game.

And one more thing to add: first I'm not a Vivek, a conservative, or a Republican sympathizer but the bolded is exactly what Vivek meant in his tweet that ended his positioning under the current Administration.