AAP - What was the 2021-22 pool cut-off for your school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they are transitioning to all Local Level IV, and everything seems to be pointing that way, then I can see local levels being set to try and limit the number of LLIV classrooms to a set number of classes, probably between 1-2 dependent on the size of the school. So if you are at a high SES school and limiting the AAP LLIV to 2 classrooms, you end up with a CogAT cut off in the 140's while a similar size Title I school will probably end up with a 120. You would end up with the same number of kids in each of the LLIV but the bar for admission is normed based on the schools scores.

But that is a hypothetical situation at the moment.

But the local building norms situation is not. It's real.

And how they determined the norms is a black box right now. That doesn't seem fair to families.

Yes, sending out an in-pool email while families can't even see what the scores are is pretty confusing, and then some schools are sending out the scores earlier than others. I didn't get the email so I only know about this by reading the threads here. I checked our mail today and we still didn't get anything.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why people are linking shifting to local AAPs as a reason to increasing the score you need to get in. You would think it would be the opposite. If all AAPs are local there should be no limit to the kids who can get the service as long as it fills out a class. If 4 out of 5 local classes are IV, GREAT!

I understand center schools cant do that, because then you would have too many kids in the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are linking shifting to local AAPs as a reason to increasing the score you need to get in. You would think it would be the opposite. If all AAPs are local there should be no limit to the kids who can get the service as long as it fills out a class. If 4 out of 5 local classes are IV, GREAT!

I understand center schools cant do that, because then you would have too many kids in the school.

No idea how it would effect staffing (there are special requirements for AAP level IV teachers) to have your scenario.

[Anonymous]

What would be the point of increasing the pool score at higher performing schools? All of the kids scoring from 132 through the cutoff will be referred. Heck, all of the kids scoring above 120 will most likely be referred. They're not decreasing the number of files they have to review.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they are transitioning to all Local Level IV, and everything seems to be pointing that way, then I can see local levels being set to try and limit the number of LLIV classrooms to a set number of classes, probably between 1-2 dependent on the size of the school. So if you are at a high SES school and limiting the AAP LLIV to 2 classrooms, you end up with a CogAT cut off in the 140's while a similar size Title I school will probably end up with a 120. You would end up with the same number of kids in each of the LLIV but the bar for admission is normed based on the schools scores.

But that is a hypothetical situation at the moment.

Out of pure curiosity, how does this work at smaller elementary schools (for example, a LLIV school with two 2nd grade classrooms)? If you're setting a local standard to fill a LLIV room for 3rd grade, it would seem you'd need a lower CogAT (of whatever test) cutoff to pull in enough kids givent the small pool to choose from, unless everyone at the school is above-average. But perhaps I'm missing something . . . we have no horse in this race, so haven't studied closely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are linking shifting to local AAPs as a reason to increasing the score you need to get in. You would think it would be the opposite. If all AAPs are local there should be no limit to the kids who can get the service as long as it fills out a class. If 4 out of 5 local classes are IV, GREAT!

I understand center schools cant do that, because then you would have too many kids in the school.

Yeah, I see no bright line to this conclusion either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are linking shifting to local AAPs as a reason to increasing the score you need to get in. You would think it would be the opposite. If all AAPs are local there should be no limit to the kids who can get the service as long as it fills out a class. If 4 out of 5 local classes are IV, GREAT!

I understand center schools cant do that, because then you would have too many kids in the school.

Yeah, I see no bright line to this conclusion either.

The alternative is that this entire thing is social engineering, since Brabrand brought up students of just 2 races and kids at title 1 schools being more likely to be in pool under the local norm pilot.

And maybe that's what it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they are transitioning to all Local Level IV, and everything seems to be pointing that way, then I can see local levels being set to try and limit the number of LLIV classrooms to a set number of classes, probably between 1-2 dependent on the size of the school. So if you are at a high SES school and limiting the AAP LLIV to 2 classrooms, you end up with a CogAT cut off in the 140's while a similar size Title I school will probably end up with a 120. You would end up with the same number of kids in each of the LLIV but the bar for admission is normed based on the schools scores.

But that is a hypothetical situation at the moment.

Out of pure curiosity, how does this work at smaller elementary schools (for example, a LLIV school with two 2nd grade classrooms)? If you're setting a local standard to fill a LLIV room for 3rd grade, it would seem you'd need a lower CogAT (of whatever test) cutoff to pull in enough kids givent the small pool to choose from, unless everyone at the school is above-average. But perhaps I'm missing something . . . we have no horse in this race, so haven't studied closely.

You just have a mixed classroom, with some level IV kids and some non-level IV. This is how our school does it already. Level IV kids rotate to a different teacher for some subjects and back to "homeroom" for things like lunch/specials/recess where there isn't differentiation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But then I would imagine that the AART would have said there is no pool for 3rd graders not 138 is not in pool unless the person misunderstood.

Exactly, they misunderstood. They may have gotten the score from the AART in one sentence. Then a few sentences later they may have learned that they still need to parent refer because their kid is not in pool. Everyone is jumping to conclusions on here because a third grade parent says their kid's 138 isn't in pool. It's ridiculous.

I wish this forum had actual logins with usernames. You could still be anonymous, but at least that way people could look at your post history to see if you were a brand new account or one posting fake stuff constantly just to troll people.

+1,000,000

I do not understand many decisions on the technology side of this board, but that one is the one I most disagree with.

Followed very closely by not updating for 15 years and having a terrible forum system that is using an even worse template that is horrendous on mobile devices.

[Anonymous]

so what does this mean in practical terms?

Depending on the school norm, you can have a kid with a 125 in-pool. If you are in pool, you get an automatic consideration and a file is sent to the committee.

You could also see a child within the new school norming receive a 135 and not be in pool.

If the 135 child has a parent that does a referral, they receive consideration and a file is sent to the committee.

Is the child with the 125 in pool score receiving preferential treatment because they are in pool or are they just getting a head start in case their parent doesn't refer as well.

I'm trying to understand the next step to this.

(still waiting for a score, but did not receive in-pool email. DS didn't take the NNAT last year so we're flying blind here.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:so what does this mean in practical terms?

Depending on the school norm, you can have a kid with a 125 in-pool. If you are in pool, you get an automatic consideration and a file is sent to the committee.

You could also see a child within the new school norming receive a 135 and not be in pool.

If the 135 child has a parent that does a referral, they receive consideration and a file is sent to the committee.

Is the child with the 125 in pool score receiving preferential treatment because they are in pool or are they just getting a head start in case their parent doesn't refer as well.

I'm trying to understand the next step to this.

(still waiting for a score, but did not receive in-pool email. DS didn't take the NNAT last year so we're flying blind here.)

The bolded, I think. In fact if the kid with the 125 who is in-pool will be behind the kid with the 135 who isn't both via score and if the 125 kid's parents never fill out the parent stuff, unless the committee sees in-pool vs. not determination. The 135 kid will have a lot more data points PLUS a higher score.

The problem is more the 135 kid whose parents don't pay attention and won't refer. That kid misses out. I know some kids in prior years whose parents were totally blase about the AAP process and would never have referred who got in and flourished thanks to the screening pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:so what does this mean in practical terms?

Depending on the school norm, you can have a kid with a 125 in-pool. If you are in pool, you get an automatic consideration and a file is sent to the committee.

You could also see a child within the new school norming receive a 135 and not be in pool.

If the 135 child has a parent that does a referral, they receive consideration and a file is sent to the committee.

Is the child with the 125 in pool score receiving preferential treatment because they are in pool or are they just getting a head start in case their parent doesn't refer as well.

I'm trying to understand the next step to this.

(still waiting for a score, but did not receive in-pool email. DS didn't take the NNAT last year so we're flying blind here.)

Yes, that is what I want to know as well. Typically they say it doesn't matter that much if you're "in-pool" because parents can still refer, but we know that at some level kids with the scores close to in-pool are more likely to be accepted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people are linking shifting to local AAPs as a reason to increasing the score you need to get in. You would think it would be the opposite. If all AAPs are local there should be no limit to the kids who can get the service as long as it fills out a class. If 4 out of 5 local classes are IV, GREAT!

I understand center schools cant do that, because then you would have too many kids in the school.

Yeah, I see no bright line to this conclusion either.

The alternative is that this entire thing is social engineering, since Brabrand brought up students of just 2 races and kids at title 1 schools being more likely to be in pool under the local norm pilot.

And maybe that's what it is.

Use whatever label you like, but it's clear that this is about efforts to increase equity per last year's report.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BPLQKV69B096/$file/FCPS%20final%20report%2005.05.20.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so what does this mean in practical terms?

Depending on the school norm, you can have a kid with a 125 in-pool. If you are in pool, you get an automatic consideration and a file is sent to the committee.

You could also see a child within the new school norming receive a 135 and not be in pool.

If the 135 child has a parent that does a referral, they receive consideration and a file is sent to the committee.

Is the child with the 125 in pool score receiving preferential treatment because they are in pool or are they just getting a head start in case their parent doesn't refer as well.

I'm trying to understand the next step to this.

(still waiting for a score, but did not receive in-pool email. DS didn't take the NNAT last year so we're flying blind here.)

The bolded, I think. In fact if the kid with the 125 who is in-pool will be behind the kid with the 135 who isn't both via score and if the 125 kid's parents never fill out the parent stuff, unless the committee sees in-pool vs. not determination. The 135 kid will have a lot more data points PLUS a higher score.

The problem is more the 135 kid whose parents don't pay attention and won't refer. That kid misses out. I know some kids in prior years whose parents were totally blase about the AAP process and would never have referred who got in and flourished thanks to the screening pool.

The committee does know if they were in-pool. I have a child that applied a few years ago and when I requested to copy of the referral packet, the front page had a note that said "in-pool".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so what does this mean in practical terms?

Depending on the school norm, you can have a kid with a 125 in-pool. If you are in pool, you get an automatic consideration and a file is sent to the committee.

You could also see a child within the new school norming receive a 135 and not be in pool.

If the 135 child has a parent that does a referral, they receive consideration and a file is sent to the committee.

Is the child with the 125 in pool score receiving preferential treatment because they are in pool or are they just getting a head start in case their parent doesn't refer as well.

I'm trying to understand the next step to this.

(still waiting for a score, but did not receive in-pool email. DS didn't take the NNAT last year so we're flying blind here.)

The bolded, I think. In fact if the kid with the 125 who is in-pool will be behind the kid with the 135 who isn't both via score and if the 125 kid's parents never fill out the parent stuff, unless the committee sees in-pool vs. not determination. The 135 kid will have a lot more data points PLUS a higher score.

The problem is more the 135 kid whose parents don't pay attention and won't refer. That kid misses out. I know some kids in prior years whose parents were totally blase about the AAP process and would never have referred who got in and flourished thanks to the screening pool.

The committee does know if they were in-pool. I have a child that applied a few years ago and when I requested to copy of the referral packet, the front page had a note that said "in-pool".

Interesting. I would think given the "equity" focus of this change there will be more pressure to accept kids who are in-pool....