AAP Results and Discussion 2025

[Anonymous]

The test is only one part of the AAP packet. Teacher HOPE score is most important so those 7 year old kids you are accusing of prepping and cheating also need to have a teacher give them a high hope score. The kids also need to have work samples from school and maybe home.

I got a book off Amazon. We went over a few questions my kids got wrong. Yes, this would have raised my kid’s score a few points. My kids practice, train and get coached 100x more in their sports. These few hours for cogat practice was like an hour on the weekend for a few weekends before the test. Any parent who cares could and would have also bought the same book off Amazon that we did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The test is only one part of the AAP packet. Teacher HOPE score is most important so those 7 year old kids you are accusing of prepping and cheating also need to have a teacher give them a high hope score. The kids also need to have work samples from school and maybe home.

I got a book off Amazon. We went over a few questions my kids got wrong. Yes, this would have raised my kid’s score a few points. My kids practice, train and get coached 100x more in their sports. These few hours for cogat practice was like an hour on the weekend for a few weekends before the test. Any parent who cares could and would have also bought the same book off Amazon that we did.

No, we don’t all do that because some of us want an accurate depiction of our child’s aptitude.

[Anonymous]

For those claiming prepping is cheating:

Do you ever correct your child's grammar? Stop cheating.
Do you ever make analogies with your child? Stop cheating.
Do you ever use logic to reason with your child? Stop cheating.

/sacasm

Oh, you only consider purchasing books or spending money cheating? What if one doesn't spend any money but teaches on their own like a book would? Is that cheating? Oh, you only consider cheating if the intention is prepping? What if someone doesn't intentionally go over topics from the test, but teaches about analogies and deduction for everyday things, because you know, they're useful concepts in life.

Not everyone has the same degree of definition of cheating. Unless everyone in FCPS votes and agrees on what constitutes cheating, stop being judgemental using only your definition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Well no his problems came when he went on to insult American culture. It's ironic that he praises the hard work ethic grinding away at intellectual endeavors but his lack of soft skills quickly stopped him in his tracks. It will take a while before he and those like him understand this.

These are the kids with low HOPE scores who go on to hit a glass ceiling in life/their careers because they have the emotional intelligence of a dishrag. They don't understand there is more to success than high standardized test scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The test is only one part of the AAP packet. Teacher HOPE score is most important so those 7 year old kids you are accusing of prepping and cheating also need to have a teacher give them a high hope score. The kids also need to have work samples from school and maybe home.

I got a book off Amazon. We went over a few questions my kids got wrong. Yes, this would have raised my kid’s score a few points. My kids practice, train and get coached 100x more in their sports. These few hours for cogat practice was like an hour on the weekend for a few weekends before the test. Any parent who cares could and would have also bought the same book off Amazon that we did.

Personally this level of prep is not what I would call cheating/taking short cuts. It's likely to help a little but not a lot.

[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.

This is a high quality post, thanks. I don't agree with all of it, but most. I understand the cultural aspect of this. I would still call this cheating insofar as it's not at all how the test is intended to be taken and provides misleading results, hence FCPS's efforts to claw back AAP from those who would get in this way. But maybe my disdain comes from my own cultural upbringing--I heard about these CogAT classes and as much as I was afraid DC's scores wouldn't be good enough on their own, I could not bring myself to sign up for this.

It's also not simply about valuing academics above all. We value academics highly but not as a competitive sport and not with designs to get into TJ or MIT. (TJ would be nice but it's not something I'll be pushing and scheming over).

In fact, the holistic evaluation is less gameable because they are looking at so many things and can see when the child is very test savvy but not great at reading, or other things the HOPE is assessing. I also agree there are other skills that are important that some of these kids are lacking and I think FCPS wants to see this as well (and I made sure to mention those in my parent referral).

[Anonymous]

Current Grade: 3rd
NNAT: 129 (retake 3rd grade)
CoGAT: 132
In Pool (Yes/No): No (?)
iReady Math Percentile: 95th
iReady Reading Percentile: 85th
Hope/ don’t know
Pyramid: Marshall
In/ yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Well no his problems came when he went on to insult American culture. It's ironic that he praises the hard work ethic grinding away at intellectual endeavors but his lack of soft skills quickly stopped him in his tracks. It will take a while before he and those like him understand this.

These are the kids with low HOPE scores who go on to hit a glass ceiling in life/their careers because they have the emotional intelligence of a dishrag. They don't understand there is more to success than high standardized test scores.

Asian American here. I have relatives in Asia who have to study all day and attend those after school academies. This needs to be done in those countries because to gain acceptance into college, you need to do well on the college entrance exam. Imagine a test that is so competitive that all kids need to study this hard. I feel grateful my kids get to live in America and enjoy American culture.

My kids all got into AAP easily. I won’t apologize for the very few hours we took a few practice tests. This was a piece of cake. They all scored 99th percentile with little effort. We are not all sending our kids to test prep centers for these relatively easy tests.

[Anonymous]

Enrichment is enrichment, it will improve grades and test scores, just like introducing academic topics at home will. Both practices are reasonably normal in many families.

Buying a book or enrolling in a class to study for a specific test is prep. SAT prep was new when I was in HS and many people thought it was problematic. Over time it has become normalized. Prepping kids for intelligence exams is not likely to be normalized and the CoGAT and NNAT is a proxy for an intelligence exams. They have diminished in their importance in AAP selection because a large enough group are prepping g for them. Classes are openly advertised and books are sold at HMART and other stores.

Plenty of kids with scores in the 130’s and strong iReady scores are accepted. People don’t believe scores in the 140’s and iReadys in the 90th-95th percentile, the scores don’t match and point to prep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Enrichment is enrichment, it will improve grades and test scores, just like introducing academic topics at home will. Both practices are reasonably normal in many families.

Buying a book or enrolling in a class to study for a specific test is prep. SAT prep was new when I was in HS and many people thought it was problematic. Over time it has become normalized. Prepping kids for intelligence exams is not likely to be normalized and the CoGAT and NNAT is a proxy for an intelligence exams. They have diminished in their importance in AAP selection because a large enough group are prepping g for them. Classes are openly advertised and books are sold at HMART and other stores.

Plenty of kids with scores in the 130’s and strong iReady scores are accepted. People don’t believe scores in the 140’s and iReadys in the 90th-95th percentile, the scores don’t match and point to prep.

Huh, my kid last year had low-ish iReadys (mid-80th percentile, not even high enough to get into level II at our school) and CogAT in the high 130s and she was accepted.

Most of you people who talk about how the committee can spot prep a mile away are full of it. You have no idea how the committee works and should admit it.

And yeah, we prepped. We got a book and did it. No regrets that my kid understood how the questions worked. We "prepped" in other ways in that we introduced her to logic games early, built math skills into her early childhood, taught her to read ourselves, and taught her spelling over the summer. Parents are, after all, a child's first and primary teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Well no his problems came when he went on to insult American culture. It's ironic that he praises the hard work ethic grinding away at intellectual endeavors but his lack of soft skills quickly stopped him in his tracks. It will take a while before he and those like him understand this.

These are the kids with low HOPE scores who go on to hit a glass ceiling in life/their careers because they have the emotional intelligence of a dishrag. They don't understand there is more to success than high standardized test scores.

Not sure how it relates, but out of curiosity, exactly did Vivek say on social media?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Enrichment is enrichment, it will improve grades and test scores, just like introducing academic topics at home will. Both practices are reasonably normal in many families.

Buying a book or enrolling in a class to study for a specific test is prep. SAT prep was new when I was in HS and many people thought it was problematic. Over time it has become normalized. Prepping kids for intelligence exams is not likely to be normalized and the CoGAT and NNAT is a proxy for an intelligence exams. They have diminished in their importance in AAP selection because a large enough group are prepping g for them. Classes are openly advertised and books are sold at HMART and other stores.

Plenty of kids with scores in the 130’s and strong iReady scores are accepted. People don’t believe scores in the 140’s and iReadys in the 90th-95th percentile, the scores don’t match and point to prep.

Huh, my kid last year had low-ish iReadys (mid-80th percentile, not even high enough to get into level II at our school) and CogAT in the high 130s and she was accepted.

Most of you people who talk about how the committee can spot prep a mile away are full of it. You have no idea how the committee works and should admit it.

And yeah, we prepped. We got a book and did it. No regrets that my kid understood how the questions worked. We "prepped" in other ways in that we introduced her to logic games early, built math skills into her early childhood, taught her to read ourselves, and taught her spelling over the summer. Parents are, after all, a child's first and primary teachers.

I agree. I also think it's a long-term endeavor and generally one that will cause all the indicators to rise (grades, iReady scores, classroom behavior).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Enrichment is enrichment, it will improve grades and test scores, just like introducing academic topics at home will. Both practices are reasonably normal in many families.

Buying a book or enrolling in a class to study for a specific test is prep. SAT prep was new when I was in HS and many people thought it was problematic. Over time it has become normalized. Prepping kids for intelligence exams is not likely to be normalized and the CoGAT and NNAT is a proxy for an intelligence exams. They have diminished in their importance in AAP selection because a large enough group are prepping g for them. Classes are openly advertised and books are sold at HMART and other stores.

Plenty of kids with scores in the 130’s and strong iReady scores are accepted. People don’t believe scores in the 140’s and iReadys in the 90th-95th percentile, the scores don’t match and point to prep.

Huh, my kid last year had low-ish iReadys (mid-80th percentile, not even high enough to get into level II at our school) and CogAT in the high 130s and she was accepted.

Most of you people who talk about how the committee can spot prep a mile away are full of it. You have no idea how the committee works and should admit it.

And yeah, we prepped. We got a book and did it. No regrets that my kid understood how the questions worked. We "prepped" in other ways in that we introduced her to logic games early, built math skills into her early childhood, taught her to read ourselves, and taught her spelling over the summer. Parents are, after all, a child's first and primary teachers.

This isn't what people mean by 'prep' ffs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Enrichment is enrichment, it will improve grades and test scores, just like introducing academic topics at home will. Both practices are reasonably normal in many families.

Buying a book or enrolling in a class to study for a specific test is prep. SAT prep was new when I was in HS and many people thought it was problematic. Over time it has become normalized. Prepping kids for intelligence exams is not likely to be normalized and the CoGAT and NNAT is a proxy for an intelligence exams. They have diminished in their importance in AAP selection because a large enough group are prepping g for them. Classes are openly advertised and books are sold at HMART and other stores.

Plenty of kids with scores in the 130’s and strong iReady scores are accepted. People don’t believe scores in the 140’s and iReadys in the 90th-95th percentile, the scores don’t match and point to prep.

Huh, my kid last year had low-ish iReadys (mid-80th percentile, not even high enough to get into level II at our school) and CogAT in the high 130s and she was accepted.

Most of you people who talk about how the committee can spot prep a mile away are full of it. You have no idea how the committee works and should admit it.

And yeah, we prepped. We got a book and did it. No regrets that my kid understood how the questions worked. We "prepped" in other ways in that we introduced her to logic games early, built math skills into her early childhood, taught her to read ourselves, and taught her spelling over the summer. Parents are, after all, a child's first and primary teachers.

This isn't what people mean by 'prep' ffs.

Some people say a book is "prep," read upthread. And some people say it requires intensive classes. Which is part of why it's ridiculous when people try to act like they have the crystal ball on what the committee thinks.

It's also true that "the" committee is really 6 teachers (AARTs, 2nd grade teachers, etc.) in a group reviewing packets together. Each group of 6 is going to be a little different, despite all getting the same half-day training (IIRC) on packets. There's not one monolith. It's not like the AAP office is reviewing 3000 packets or whatever it is every year just the small group of them. It's a huge group of people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Enrichment is enrichment, it will improve grades and test scores, just like introducing academic topics at home will. Both practices are reasonably normal in many families.

Buying a book or enrolling in a class to study for a specific test is prep. SAT prep was new when I was in HS and many people thought it was problematic. Over time it has become normalized. Prepping kids for intelligence exams is not likely to be normalized and the CoGAT and NNAT is a proxy for an intelligence exams. They have diminished in their importance in AAP selection because a large enough group are prepping g for them. Classes are openly advertised and books are sold at HMART and other stores.

Plenty of kids with scores in the 130’s and strong iReady scores are accepted. People don’t believe scores in the 140’s and iReadys in the 90th-95th percentile, the scores don’t match and point to prep.

The CogAT and iready are measuring different things. They aren't designed to "match." This has been explained ad nauseam to you. There are so many reasons that a kid might have a gifted level CogAT, a lower iready, and not be a prepper. I would expect this profile from gifted kids who: have undiagnosed ADHD or dyslexia, have unenriched home lives, were sick or had an off day for iready, clicked through iready quickly to get to the games, or just who had asynchronous development in their skills (common for gifted kids).

Also, you're assuming that it's even possible to prep a non-AAP caliber kid up to a 140+ CogAT. If it is possible to train the kid to earn a 140+ CogAT, then the kid is showing strong abilities to learn, which in turn means the kid will have no problems with AAP.