Still get in if low score in one area?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess is only the fall scores will be included

I think they will take iReady again in winter and spring

Shouldnt winter/spring scores be correct reflection of a grade skill to take into consideration, if the committees are meeting in late first quarter of the year?

Not everyone takes the iReady in the Winter. At some schools the only kids who take the iReady in the winter are those who are below grade level. Some schools skip the winter cycle. Some schools everyone takes it. The fall scores are the only ones that everyone will have taken at the same time so that is what is used.

Two sub-132 scores is not promising for LIV services unless you are at a LIV or near LIV school. You are more likely to end up with Advanced Math if the math scores are high then LIV.

A lot of kids get accepted into AAP with all of their scores below 132. Also, the GBRS has been by far the most important metric for acceptance, and that will likely continue with their new scale. There's no need for OP to panic about the scores. OP just needs to craft the referral form, questionnaire, and work samples in a way that shows that the kid can handle AAP work in the area of weakness.

Parent referral form, work samples etc should not indicate that the child can “handle LIV work,” but rather that the child “needs LIV work.” Important difference.

But this is in the context of a child with a lower score in one area. It's going to be hard to show that a kid with a 111 in one area "needs LIV work" in that area. The parent referral should try to show that the kid needs AAP in the area of strength with the presumably 140+ subject score, but can still handle AAP in the area of weakness. Or, OP needs to show that the lower CogAT subscore does not reflect the kid's actual ability in that area.

How does one show this?

Different poster. Iready scores (if high) and submit a great writing sample. I’d personally get a WISC too, if you think the score is uncharacteristically low. My child had a lower verbal score, which made no sense given ability, but we knew things went sideways in the classroom during testing before we even got results. We got a wisc and verbal was 99%.

[Anonymous]

We haven’t gotten any scores back yet (4th and 2nd - new to fcps). When should we receive them? Is it by snail mail?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We haven’t gotten any scores back yet (4th and 2nd - new to fcps). When should we receive them? Is it by snail mail?

I think they were later this year in a number of places bc of a glitch w the testing company. We got results the first week of December last year, around a week before referral was due.

[Anonymous]

DC had 117 nv while the rest were in the 131-148 range (145 q), Iready always at 99% from 1st-2nd grade, plus above grade level/level II on report card since 1st grade and high prf. I was worried since DC was at a high ses school but he’s in the 1st run. The AART wants to see consistency but not just one time high test score, but if only q is high and v is too low kid probably will land in advanced math ( if without high Iready). Depend on your DC’s situation you may want to consider retake or just submit good referral.