cutoff scores for Fairfax County GT centers for this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I disagree with the approach here. TO me, late is late--I would and will (vigorously) object if this happens. My son is in the pool and we're talking about kids who didn't score high enough on the standardized tests--nationally recognized benchmarks for GT success; afterall, the vast majority of kids with cut-off score make it, the opposite is true for those that don't. I would think these parents, if they felt so strongly about applying and that the tests don't fully measure their child's potential, would have filled out the 1 page form weeks ago. It seems like we're making excuse for the exception and not for those the program is intended.

Wow. So if a student is not feeling well, or doesn't do well in a group test environment, but does beautifully on a comparable standardized test (also a nationally recognized benchmark for GT success) one-on-one with a licensed psychologist -- then that student should be excluded from consideration?

Wow. All I can say is wow. I'm so glad that FCPS doesn't use your rubric for GT Center-eligibility.

I'm sure the committee is alert to someone hiring a pyschologist to come up with a report that, surprise, who has a really high score. I'll bet this happens a lot. Hiring an expert, paid by the parents, lessens the value of these scores. Why would kid magically do better on one test than on two administered under the same coniditions for all kids--gee, why don't colleges allow private SATs?? The COGAT has 3 parts and is administered on 3 different days--so the kid all these days?

The County should limit extra testing to only GMU.

Since we are assuming that private psychologists can be bought, we should also assume that there are some aggressive pushy parents can find a "rotten apple" FCPS teacher and buy her/him too. we got our child tested because he came just short of the cogat/nnat scores. given his excellent grades and an expected good gbrs we were not relying on the private wisc only. parents who believe that the one good cogat score will be the ticket to gt should read the selection process. no point trying to disqualify others based on scores or anything else. worry about your own kid.

[Anonymous]

I agree. I don't get the competition thing. I was told the number of slots is not limited. Children who qualify for the service will get it. I agree that a child could still qualify even if they had an off day for the NNAT or CogAt. My DC happens to be in the pool (with a 150 on one section of the CogAT but otherwise "just" above average scores). I do not think DC is a shoo in by any stretch, which is why we included extra materials that everyone seems to think are useless. I have no idea how DC will do on the GBRS since I guess it is done by the reading teacher (who is not DC's homeroom teacher and I'e never spoken to). I find the process less than transparent, but ultimately feel that we put forth the best picture of DC that we could and if it doesn't work out, then we will revisit our options.

[Anonymous]

Oh come on. I graduated from TJ in the mid '90s and (back then!) we all knew that there were certain psychologists to go to for testing if you didn't make the pool. I remember their names and know that they're still in business.

[Anonymous]

LOL! Some of us are obviously not as well plugged in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree. I don't get the competition thing. I was told the number of slots is not limited. Children who qualify for the service will get it. I agree that a child could still qualify even if they had an off day for the NNAT or CogAt. My DC happens to be in the pool (with a 150 on one section of the CogAT but otherwise "just" above average scores). I do not think DC is a shoo in by any stretch, which is why we included extra materials that everyone seems to think are useless. I have no idea how DC will do on the GBRS since I guess it is done by the reading teacher (who is not DC's homeroom teacher and I'e never spoken to). I find the process less than transparent, but ultimately feel that we put forth the best picture of DC that we could and if it doesn't work out, then we will revisit our options.

We're not really talking about competition for spaces. This is all about kids whose parents can't accept the fact that their child isn't GT material and will push every boundary and pay any amount of money. My daughter is in GT and it is pretty clear who really made it and who shouldn't have, but that's ok. It just makes it easier for my daughter when compared to these kids. If these parents have dreams of TJ its a total illusion, they'll never cut it there. So, go ahead, stuff the GT file with silly examples of "GT" work, award certificates and letters of recommendation from soccer coaches.

I don't get the point about the teachers and being able "to buy" them. Never have seen this and doubt it really occurs.

[Anonymous]

The point is about the process. There will always be parents that think their kid is the brainiest. And there is nothing wrong with that either. As long as there is a process to objectively assess who makes the cut everybody is fine.

There was a PP who wants to question the county for accepting referrals past the due date even if there was bad weather. Only because the PPs kid would have less of a chance. And that is the kind of parent that gets into fights in kids' soccer games. lighten up. If your kid is good - it does not matter whether other kids gave in their applications late or were sick on the day of testing or anything else. And if your kid is not good enough - there are enough kids that have done well without GT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The point is about the process. There will always be parents that think their kid is the brainiest. And there is nothing wrong with that either. As long as there is a process to objectively assess who makes the cut everybody is fine.

There was a PP who wants to question the county for accepting referrals past the due date even if there was bad weather. Only because the PPs kid would have less of a chance. And that is the kind of parent that gets into fights in kids' soccer games. lighten up. If your kid is good - it does not matter whether other kids gave in their applications late or were sick on the day of testing or anything else. And if your kid is not good enough - there are enough kids that have done well without GT.

Not my kid, he's already in the pool wtih solid grades and in the pull-out for math and reading: nothing to worry about.

Its the kids who do have a lot to worry about (or their parents) and shouldn't be in this program that make endless excuses and arguments for exceptions. e.g., my kid was sick the day(s) of the COGaT/NNAT2, my kid skipped a page on the test, bad weather prevented me from submitting a 1 page form I knew weeks ago I had to submit a 1 page form. Kids realize what's going on and learn that making excuses is ok and a substitute for earning something.

Your point about kids doing well without GT is 100% correct and I wish more parents would look at this in the same way. It seems some parents think its now or never, therefore they'll do and say anything.

[Anonymous]

New to this, but have to agree with the PP that late applications should not be allowed. Its a good question why parents whose child does not make the 130 pool, after being notified before Christmas, then wait five/six+ weeks. This is a good lesson for procrastinators. If you are one of the parents who will submit the next day school opens, which seems to be the policy, why did you wait?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New to this, but have to agree with the PP that late applications should not be allowed. Its a good question why parents whose child does not make the 130 pool, after being notified before Christmas, then wait five/six+ weeks. This is a good lesson for procrastinators. If you are one of the parents who will submit the next day school opens, which seems to be the policy, why did you wait?

Not all school sent the scores before Christmas. Our scores didn't come out until the first or second week of January (DC is in the pool, though, so it wasn't a big deal for us). One PP said her DC's scores weren't out until mid-January and she never got the notification letter although her child should be in the pool based on the scores. You can hardly call it procrastination when the person never got the info.

[Anonymous]

Seriously? Not that anyone owes you an explanation, but....

- not all schools notify before the break, many do so the week after or even longer

- some schools don't have their informational meetings on the process until mid January

- if you need to photograph and/or scan samples, then it can take time (not all of us are so tech savvy)

- if you want letters of recommendation, you have to ask people, they have to respond and then you need to wait for them to reply back

All of that can easily take until February 5. And what about the parents who are not savvy in the system or for whom English is not their first langauge? Who may not realize they have an option to file an appeal? Our school does NOT make this obvious until their newsletter that comes out in mid January.

My kid was in the pool (last year) but it took us almost the entire time to assemble the packet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New to this, but have to agree with the PP that late applications should not be allowed. Its a good question why parents whose child does not make the 130 pool, after being notified before Christmas, then wait five/six+ weeks. This is a good lesson for procrastinators. If you are one of the parents who will submit the next day school opens, which seems to be the policy, why did you wait?

We waited beacuse we wanted to get DC evaluated for a WISC to see if we should put in the referral. We had no pre-conceived notion that DC should be referred because he was brilliant. The Cogat scores (he missed 2 of 3 by 2 points and one by 4) pointed us to evaluate our own assessment of DC (maybe he does not need to go to GT?). Unfortunately the WISC was scheduled in early Feb (separately documented here that appointments are hard to come by). Only once the DC did well in the WISC did we choose to refer. The WISC is not just evidence for the FCPS - it told us whether we should apply for DC as well. Agreed that "late applications" should not be accepted. But it is FCPS that determines what is late not other parents who are better off by having a smaller pool. Also documented here - approximately 66% of the automatic pool gets selected for GT eventually and about 50% of the parent referred pool gets selected eventually. Cannot comprehend the self-righteous anger of the posters here - tell me it is not anything but selfish! Your kids are in grade 2 - if you belive that the only way to go up is by denying fair opportunity to others than you have greater parenting challenges ahead. All the best!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New to this, but have to agree with the PP that late applications should not be allowed. Its a good question why parents whose child does not make the 130 pool, after being notified before Christmas, then wait five/six+ weeks. This is a good lesson for procrastinators. If you are one of the parents who will submit the next day school opens, which seems to be the policy, why did you wait?

Not all school sent the scores before Christmas. Our scores didn't come out until the first or second week of January (DC is in the pool, though, so it wasn't a big deal for us). One PP said her DC's scores weren't out until mid-January and she never got the notification letter although her child should be in the pool based on the scores. You can hardly call it procrastination when the person never got the info.

Good point--somebody should get tell Dr. Horn to fix this inconsistency in the process. It is so simply to fix and sounds like some school principals should be called on the carpet to explain and maybe find new jobs. I know in the private sector, this would not be tolerated--you'd be collecting unemployment and hoping to find a new job. Maybe these school adminstrators have tenure and have a "whatever" attitutude and no oversight by the FCPS adminstration. If this were my school, I'd fire off an email to Dr. Dale and demand answers--he makes $200k+/year and should be accountable: "the buck stops here."

[Anonymous]

We waited beacuse we wanted to get DC evaluated for a WISC to see if we should put in the referral. We had no pre-conceived notion that DC should be referred because he was brilliant. The Cogat scores (he missed 2 of 3 by 2 points and one by 4) pointed us to evaluate our own assessment of DC (maybe he does not need to go to GT?). Unfortunately the WISC was scheduled in early Feb (separately documented here that appointments are hard to come by). Only once the DC did well in the WISC did we choose to refer. The WISC is not just evidence for the FCPS - it told us whether we should apply for DC as well. Agreed that "late applications" should not be accepted. But it is FCPS that determines what is late not other parents who are better off by having a smaller pool. Also documented here - approximately 66% of the automatic pool gets selected for GT eventually and about 50% of the parent referred pool gets selected eventually. Cannot comprehend the self-righteous anger of the posters here - tell me it is not anything but selfish! Your kids are in grade 2 - if you belive that the only way to go up is by denying fair opportunity to others than you have greater parenting challenges ahead. All the best!

As one of the posters who disagrees with the many excuses advanced, I don't think FCPS should allow a parent to hire a private pyschologist to generate a report that supports a child's application. I'd love to know the stats on the range of scores for these "experts." My hunch is their scores are significantly higher than what would be expected from a pool of children who performed "below expectations" where the test conditions were fair and equal for everybody. Allowing these students in weakens the GT program. The admission stats cited above are from FCPS AAP, but go to fcag.org and they tell you the reall story: almost 15% of FC children are now in GT up from 5-6% in the 90's. Are children getting smarter or are parent just deciding that they need to go all out earlier and earlier to hopefully increase the child's chances of admission to an elite university?

[Anonymous]

almost 15% of FC children are now in GT up from 5-6% in the 90's

FCPS used to have significantly higher cutoff scores for the GT pool. Lowering the cutoff is a choice that FCPS has chosen to make.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

almost 15% of FC children are now in GT up from 5-6% in the 90's

FCPS used to have significantly higher cutoff scores for the GT pool. Lowering the cutoff is a choice that FCPS has chosen to make.

I'd bet this is because they're tired of being bombarded by pushy parents who will stop at nothing to get their child into this program. Do you really think we now have double the number of gifted children over the past 10-15 years? Maybe so, but I doubt it.