2019 AAP Results

[Anonymous]

Cogat 146. In.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:High enough test scores or reading level should be a guaranteed admit, then.

Except that reading level is subjective. It all depends on the teacher....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS isn't transparent with anything. The last time they released median NNAT and CogAT scores for the accepted students was around 2001. They don't want any of us to know these things.

I've been tempted to do a FOIA, just because I think it would be an interesting data set to play with.

If you know how to do a FOIA request, please do. If the scores posted on this thread are really accurate, even if they are a small percentage of scores, more transparency is needed.

Doubt you can FOIA anything very helpful due to FERPA. But they definitely could release aggregate data to be more transparent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are trying to find patterns. There are no patterns.

The only pattern would be that they flipped the results

Seriously, give it a rest. A SMALL subsection (about 40 out of hundreds posted their score) of the AAP population posts in this board. And to extrapolate that the scores were flipped is crazy. Of course, people who got in that did not except to would post. And, those that with high scores that did not get in would post. But I am sure there are many, many, more people out there that got the results they were expected and do not feel the need to post their scores.

+1

Let's assume the pp is correct and only a small subsection of the scores had results similar to those posted here. Even if that's the case, don't you think this albeit small sampling (assuming the posts are truthful) shows a need for more transparency in the process. Some of the scores were incredibly low. If your child legitimately had high scores with no prepping and was rejected, while the low scores listed here were found eligible, are you saying you would not want more transparency as to why this happened? Maybe the letters weren't flipped, but the process needs more transparency. Alternatively, maybe there needs to be two ways to get in: 1. scores and 2. scores plus teacher recommendations. If FCPS is going to say scores are indicative of eligibility, a teacher shouldn't be able to override that, nor should an assumption of prepping if the GBRS commentary doesn't match the test scores. Having an objective admissions standard for automatically admitting students, and also allowing other student to get in based on a combination of scores and GBRS seems like a better process. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the concerns expressed her merely because they only account for a minority of applicants. You also have no clue whether this extrapolates into the general pool.

I never said there shouldn't be transparency. I just said don't rush to the judgement that a mistake was made based on the small sampling represented here.

I think FCPS is doing the best it can. No, I don't work for FCPS. I think FCPS recognizes that test scores, alone, are not enough. Its no different than applying for college. Colleges look at much more than a high SAT/ACT score. They look at the whole package - recommendations, extracurricular activities, grades, etc. Scoring a perfect on the SAT is not going to get you into Harvard. So, why should a high CoGat score automatically qualify you for AAP?

At the end of the day, its AAP. It is not going to make or break your child and their college path.

Scoring a perfect score on the SAT isn't going to get you into Harvard, but you also get the opportunity to pick the teachers who most likely support you to write your letters of recommendation. Not the case in the AAP application process. The GBRS is super subjective and you don't get to pick who fills that out. But, more importantly, these are second graders we're talking about and, unlike Harvard, there is supposedly no limit on the number of kids admitted each year. I'm not saying this because my kid didn't get good GBRS commentary. My kid had great commentary and was found eligible. If the first grade teacher (who was no longer at the school) had input, I am willing to bet the commentary would have been way less glowing. If you have kids in AAP as currently structured you should know that any kid who has high scores and all As can definitely handle the curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Scoring a perfect on the SAT is not going to get you into Harvard. So, why should a high CoGat score automatically qualify you for AAP?

It's not quite an apples-to-apples comparison. Harvard has a limited number of spots with a vast number of perfect candidates. AAP theoretically has unlimited slots. There isn't a good reason to exclude kids with high CogAT scores from a program serving over 20% of FCPS students with no strict upper limit on the numbers admitted.

I think that at some center schools, there may really be a maximum limit. At our center school, something like 30% of the 2nd grade goes on to AAP, plus they have to accommodate the kids from the local non-center schools. And I would guess that at least 50% of our 2nd grade was either in-pool or parent-referred (based on the large crowd at AAP information night).

But when they review the files, they aren't told "be tougher on files for this zip code' or whatever. Aren't the files all jumbled up? Or is one committee reviewing all the files for one particular area/

Realistically speaking there are a limited number of seats and teachers for 3rd grade AAP. Not every school has a local Level IV program. They are no bussing kids from full centers to centers with fewer kids. So Oak Hill has a limited number of spots and has to take the kids from Oak Hill, Fox Mill, and Lee’s Corner. Fox Mill does not have a local level IV program but Lee’s Hill does. The county probably has a good fix on the number of kids who move to Oak Hill each year from Fox Mill and Lee’s Hill and how many stay at Lee’s Hill. Do we honestly think that they are going to accept all the applicants who meet the criteria if there are more candidates then there are seats? It is easier to add kids through appeal or Principal placement then it is to deal with too many kids.

I have no idea how they make the numbers work but I believe, and have no evidence to back this up, that there are going to end up being different requirements for differnt centers based on the number of qualified candidates at each center.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are trying to find patterns. There are no patterns.

The only pattern would be that they flipped the results

Seriously, give it a rest. A SMALL subsection (about 40 out of hundreds posted their score) of the AAP population posts in this board. And to extrapolate that the scores were flipped is crazy. Of course, people who got in that did not except to would post. And, those that with high scores that did not get in would post. But I am sure there are many, many, more people out there that got the results they were expected and do not feel the need to post their scores.

+1

Let's assume the pp is correct and only a small subsection of the scores had results similar to those posted here. Even if that's the case, don't you think this albeit small sampling (assuming the posts are truthful) shows a need for more transparency in the process. Some of the scores were incredibly low. If your child legitimately had high scores with no prepping and was rejected, while the low scores listed here were found eligible, are you saying you would not want more transparency as to why this happened? Maybe the letters weren't flipped, but the process needs more transparency. Alternatively, maybe there needs to be two ways to get in: 1. scores and 2. scores plus teacher recommendations. If FCPS is going to say scores are indicative of eligibility, a teacher shouldn't be able to override that, nor should an assumption of prepping if the GBRS commentary doesn't match the test scores. Having an objective admissions standard for automatically admitting students, and also allowing other student to get in based on a combination of scores and GBRS seems like a better process. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the concerns expressed her merely because they only account for a minority of applicants. You also have no clue whether this extrapolates into the general pool.

I never said there shouldn't be transparency. I just said don't rush to the judgement that a mistake was made based on the small sampling represented here.

I think FCPS is doing the best it can. No, I don't work for FCPS. I think FCPS recognizes that test scores, alone, are not enough. Its no different than applying for college. Colleges look at much more than a high SAT/ACT score. They look at the whole package - recommendations, extracurricular activities, grades, etc. Scoring a perfect on the SAT is not going to get you into Harvard. So, why should a high CoGat score automatically qualify you for AAP?

At the end of the day, its AAP. It is not going to make or break your child and their college path.

Scoring a perfect score on the SAT isn't going to get you into Harvard, but you also get the opportunity to pick the teachers who most likely support you to write your letters of recommendation. Not the case in the AAP application process. The GBRS is super subjective and you don't get to pick who fills that out. But, more importantly, these are second graders we're talking about and, unlike Harvard, there is supposedly no limit on the number of kids admitted each year. I'm not saying this because my kid didn't get good GBRS commentary. My kid had great commentary and was found eligible. If the first grade teacher (who was no longer at the school) had input, I am willing to bet the commentary would have been way less glowing. If you have kids in AAP as currently structured you should know that any kid who has high scores and all As can definitely handle the curriculum.

I disagree. That is what the parent referral is for. You can provide your own recommendations, work samples, etc. to supplement what the school supplies. I know we were repeatedly told by our AART to do the parent referral and submit work samples.

And, yes, I do have a child in the program. You are right, they should do well and handle the work load. However, you will be surprised the number that are struggling because of time management issues, less than stellar instruction, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are trying to find patterns. There are no patterns.

The only pattern would be that they flipped the results

Seriously, give it a rest. A SMALL subsection (about 40 out of hundreds posted their score) of the AAP population posts in this board. And to extrapolate that the scores were flipped is crazy. Of course, people who got in that did not except to would post. And, those that with high scores that did not get in would post. But I am sure there are many, many, more people out there that got the results they were expected and do not feel the need to post their scores.

+1

Let's assume the pp is correct and only a small subsection of the scores had results similar to those posted here. Even if that's the case, don't you think this albeit small sampling (assuming the posts are truthful) shows a need for more transparency in the process. Some of the scores were incredibly low. If your child legitimately had high scores with no prepping and was rejected, while the low scores listed here were found eligible, are you saying you would not want more transparency as to why this happened? Maybe the letters weren't flipped, but the process needs more transparency. Alternatively, maybe there needs to be two ways to get in: 1. scores and 2. scores plus teacher recommendations. If FCPS is going to say scores are indicative of eligibility, a teacher shouldn't be able to override that, nor should an assumption of prepping if the GBRS commentary doesn't match the test scores. Having an objective admissions standard for automatically admitting students, and also allowing other student to get in based on a combination of scores and GBRS seems like a better process. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the concerns expressed her merely because they only account for a minority of applicants. You also have no clue whether this extrapolates into the general pool.

I never said there shouldn't be transparency. I just said don't rush to the judgement that a mistake was made based on the small sampling represented here.

I think FCPS is doing the best it can. No, I don't work for FCPS. I think FCPS recognizes that test scores, alone, are not enough. Its no different than applying for college. Colleges look at much more than a high SAT/ACT score. They look at the whole package - recommendations, extracurricular activities, grades, etc. Scoring a perfect on the SAT is not going to get you into Harvard. So, why should a high CoGat score automatically qualify you for AAP?

At the end of the day, its AAP. It is not going to make or break your child and their college path.

Scoring a perfect score on the SAT isn't going to get you into Harvard, but you also get the opportunity to pick the teachers who most likely support you to write your letters of recommendation. Not the case in the AAP application process. The GBRS is super subjective and you don't get to pick who fills that out. But, more importantly, these are second graders we're talking about and, unlike Harvard, there is supposedly no limit on the number of kids admitted each year. I'm not saying this because my kid didn't get good GBRS commentary. My kid had great commentary and was found eligible. If the first grade teacher (who was no longer at the school) had input, I am willing to bet the commentary would have been way less glowing. If you have kids in AAP as currently structured you should know that any kid who has high scores and all As can definitely handle the curriculum.

I disagree. That is what the parent referral is for. You can provide your own recommendations, work samples, etc. to supplement what the school supplies. I know we were repeatedly told by our AART to do the parent referral and submit work samples.

And, yes, I do have a child in the program. You are right, they should do well and handle the work load. However, you will be surprised the number that are struggling because of time management issues, less than stellar instruction, etc.

Disagree all you want, but parent referral means very little relative to the FCPS GBRS. And the packet specifically says other FCPS teachers can't write letters of recommendation. Also, it's likely that the many kids struggling with time management issues are the low scoring kids shoehorned in with good GBRS, rather than the high scoring kids who were found ineligible.

[Anonymous]

My son's NNAT was 124 (93 percentile) and his COGAT is:
V: 132
Q: 123
NV: 115
Componsite (VQN): 127

He didn't get in but we included minimal work and no referral. We are wondering if there is any point appealing this. We don't know the GBRS score yet, nobody told us.

Any input? Is it worth appealing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My son's NNAT was 124 (93 percentile) and his COGAT is:
V: 132
Q: 123
NV: 115
Componsite (VQN): 127

He didn't get in but we included minimal work and no referral. We are wondering if there is any point appealing this. We don't know the GBRS score yet, nobody told us.

Any input? Is it worth appealing?

I think so. My DD got in with lower NNAT and same composite on Cogat. I submitted parent referral w/max number of samples. I have no idea what work samples were included by the school or her GBRS but she is in. I think you should try if you are at all interested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My son's NNAT was 124 (93 percentile) and his COGAT is:
V: 132
Q: 123
NV: 115
Componsite (VQN): 127

He didn't get in but we included minimal work and no referral. We are wondering if there is any point appealing this. We don't know the GBRS score yet, nobody told us.

Any input? Is it worth appealing?

My son got in a couple years ago with very similar scores. I don't remember the COGAT score breakdown but the composite was either 128 or 129 and his NNAT was similar. We never got his GBRS file but my guess, and the guesses of other posters on here, was that it wasn't spectacular and that kept him out on the first round. We got a WISC that showed some sub scores in the 98+%ile and he got in in. If you can afford it, I would suggest getting a WISC done and submitting it on appeal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My son's NNAT was 124 (93 percentile) and his COGAT is:
V: 132
Q: 123
NV: 115
Componsite (VQN): 127

He didn't get in but we included minimal work and no referral. We are wondering if there is any point appealing this. We don't know the GBRS score yet, nobody told us.

Any input? Is it worth appealing?

Were you in pool?

I would get the WISC. It can’t hurt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My son's NNAT was 124 (93 percentile) and his COGAT is:
V: 132
Q: 123
NV: 115
Componsite (VQN): 127

He didn't get in but we included minimal work and no referral. We are wondering if there is any point appealing this. We don't know the GBRS score yet, nobody told us.

Any input? Is it worth appealing?

Why not appeal? What do you have to lose by appealing? If you don't want to pay for a WISC, you can still write a parent letter, fill out the questionnaire, submit some work samples, and hope for the best. If your child is rejected on appeals, they will still create a fresh file next year for your child. So, appealing this year will not affect your chances next year at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have requested the packet-
But at this time do not know GBRS. Interestingly enough, school led me to believe prior to submitting application that they would most likely get in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would anyone know if it is very dependent on zip code? We had 140 on NNAT and 130 on COGAT. Submitted recommendations, Art, writing samples and parent questionnaire. NOT IN
Zip
22066

Did you get the gbrs?

You can request the packet.

I am guessing my kid had poor work samples and less than stellar gbrs so he was rejected with high test scores.

UPDATE:
Requested packet. 4 consistently observed with great comments from the school. Baffled about the result.

[Anonymous]

I know it sounds unfair since some kids with lower COGNAT get in
However 130 COGNAT is still under par, especially if the high score is V
The NNAT is suspected not as important as the COGNAT

So I think you should get a WISC and include it if it is better and prepare new samples that address the COGNAT weakness, either V or Q or NV

Good luck

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have requested the packet-
But at this time do not know GBRS. Interestingly enough, school led me to believe prior to submitting application that they would most likely get in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would anyone know if it is very dependent on zip code? We had 140 on NNAT and 130 on COGAT. Submitted recommendations, Art, writing samples and parent questionnaire. NOT IN
Zip
22066

Did you get the gbrs?

You can request the packet.

I am guessing my kid had poor work samples and less than stellar gbrs so he was rejected with high test scores.

UPDATE:
Requested packet. 4 consistently observed with great comments from the school. Baffled about the result.

That's great news. You're much more likely to get admitted on appeals with the high GBRS and great teacher comments. Yeah, I know it's frustrating, but you would be in a much worse position right now if the school thought poorly of your child and gave low ratings.

I disagree with the PP. I don't think there's any need for a WISC for a file that has a 140 NNAT and 130 CogAT. If you appeal with anything at all, you'll have a new group of 6 people judging your child. I can't imagine why they wouldn't accept a child with high scores who also is very highly regarded by the school.