Relative Age and AAP

[Anonymous]

I've been watching the AAP threads pretty closely these past few months, as my oldest is in second grade and going through the process. I've seen a number of comments about relative age (apparently not taken into consideration on this year's FfxAT). I have two kids on both sides of this spectrum: My oldest I held back a year (late Sept b-day was just part of it). He is thus, one of the oldest in his class. My second child is in 1st grade. She is almost 2 years younger than her older brother (July b-day), but only a year behind in school, because I sent her "on time".

I can understand, to a degree, why people may feel that an AAP admissions process that doesn't "age neutralize" kids is somewhat unfair -- but either it does or it doesn't or it doesn't do it perfectly. But at some point, as parents, aren't you worried that if your "younger" child only gets into AAP because of some "age credit" -- and then has to survive as an equal with kids who are smarter, more mature, etc. (even IF it is simply due to the fact that they're older) -- are you really doing your child a favor? Does your child really belong in that class? As a parent with 2 kids on either side of this spectrum, I have to say the current process seems pretty good to me.

I don't know --

It seems to me that if Ffx county wants to address what they see as a "redshirting problem" (and certainly I see things that seem to be an abuse of the system), that they can do that. But I don't know that it's productive to allow it in the first place, and then try to "age norm" every activity after that.

JMO. I'm sure others will have different perspectives.

[Anonymous]

OP, this is a really good point. I actually like the fact that right now we have 2 different test "grades" in terms of approach -- the NNAT which is age-normed nationally, and the FxAT which is just a percentile among FCPS kids. Because of your exact point -- that a kid 12 months younger than another could actually struggle in AAP though the age-normed scores are just as good as the older kids' scores.

That said, if all else is equal -- assuming NNAT same percentile, and same FxAT percentile, and GBRS same, I would think the younger kid is a better candidate for AAP, as the tests would show younger kid tested better "earlier".

But I think that if FCPS only looked at FxAT percentile, it would miss some younger kids that might be really bright but not quite at the 95% as they're competing with kids 12+ months older. And of course, then that would really encourage redshirting... in fact, I think that would encourage parents with late spring birthdays to hold their kids back too. We already have 18-month birthday spans in classes, we certainly don't need it to be worse.

[Anonymous]

OP, I see your point, but I agree with the second poster that "if FCPS only looked at FxAT percentile, it would miss some younger kids that might be really bright but not quite at the 95% as they're competing with kids 12+ months older. And of course, then that would really encourage redshirting".

Just FYI, age norming will be back. The AAP FAQ on the new CogAT says age norming isn't happening this year because "the number of students taking the custom form this year was not sufficient to create reliable age-based scores. In future years, however, we expect that sufficient data will be available to provide both age-based and grade-based scores based on both local and national norms."

If someone feels they were disadvantaged by not having age norming in place this year, they can always appeal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've been watching the AAP threads pretty closely these past few months, as my oldest is in second grade and going through the process. I've seen a number of comments about relative age (apparently not taken into consideration on this year's FfxAT). I have two kids on both sides of this spectrum: My oldest I held back a year (late Sept b-day was just part of it). He is thus, one of the oldest in his class. My second child is in 1st grade. She is almost 2 years younger than her older brother (July b-day), but only a year behind in school, because I sent her "on time".

I can understand, to a degree, why people may feel that an AAP admissions process that doesn't "age neutralize" kids is somewhat unfair -- but either it does or it doesn't or it doesn't do it perfectly. But at some point, as parents, aren't you worried that if your "younger" child only gets into AAP because of some "age credit" -- and then has to survive as an equal with kids who are smarter, more mature, etc. (even IF it is simply due to the fact that they're older) -- are you really doing your child a favor? Does your child really belong in that class? As a parent with 2 kids on either side of this spectrum, I have to say the current process seems pretty good to me.

I don't know --

It seems to me that if Ffx county wants to address what they see as a "redshirting problem" (and certainly I see things that seem to be an abuse of the system), that they can do that. But I don't know that it's productive to allow it in the first place, and then try to "age norm" every activity after that.

JMO. I'm sure others will have different perspectives.

I think that many people missed the point of age-normalization in tests like the CogAT or FxAT. If these were regular knowledge-based tests (reading, math etc.), the point above (in bold) would be valid. However, these tests are age-normed because of the kind of questions they include, which are intelligence-based questions. That's why IQ-based testing always takes into consideration age, especially in young kids, independently of general knowledge or grade. In the classroom however, all kids will be exposed to learning the same knowledge, not IQ testing. Therefore, the issue of "not belonging" with the older kids is not going to be applicable anymore, as smart kids (hopefully identified through NNAT and CogAT testing) can handle advanced knowledge without any problem.

[Anonymous]

Also, with or without redshirting, you will always have the possibility of kids being about 12 months apart in class since one could be born on October 1st of one year and another on September 30 of the following year. They're in the same class but they're 12 months apart.

[Anonymous]

really, there's a thread on this? perspective please. I know it seems like life or death, but truly if your 2nd grader doesn't test into AAP because she is the youngest in the class and a little behind in development, she can simply take the test again next year and move in 4th grade when she's ready. My son didn't enter AAP until 5th grade since we moved here from somewhere else and despite being a shy non-sporty kid who was behind in math from his previous school, he found his way. Yes, he struggled to make friends at first and of course I had all sorts of worries. But have faith, they really do end up where they need to be. By the end of his first year at the center, he was at the top of his class in math and has continued to win academic awards through high school.

so much of the aap angst on these forums reminds me of the people who agonized about getting their kids into the "right" preschool. and how much did that matter?

[Anonymous]

It didn't...maybe the Montessori kids read a little sooner but my the end of 1st/ beginning of 2nd it sort of all evens out. I really think preschool does not matter at all except for social stuff or if you do immersion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: But at some point, as parents, aren't you worried that if your "younger" child only gets into AAP because of some "age credit" -- and then has to survive as an equal with kids who are smarter, more mature, etc.

This should be a concern. Older kids on average will do better in the beginning due to maturity, later will continue to do better due to boosted confidence. They will receive more attentions from teachers and that will also help motivate them. I remember reading a report here from a thread about the early birthdays for hockey players in Canada, same mechanism. Also, in my DC's AAP class, the top kids have Oct, Nov, and Dec birthdays.

[Anonymous]

^I remember hearing about people who clerked at the Supreme Court, they all tend to have Oct, Nov, Dec birthdays too but they went to school when the cutoff was Dec 31 so they tend be younger than their peers. Red shirting all evens out intellectually at the end. It does give advantages in sports though although everyone's caught on and things like travel soccer goes by age now not grade.