What are true criteria to get into full-time FCPS?

[Anonymous]

Your scores are good but not spectacular. The issue is it’s difficult for a kid coming in from outside the district - whether that’s a different public school district or private school - to get into AAP. The committee has a certain way that they want the recommendations and teacher forms filled out, that the 2nd grade FCPS teachers (who are the ones doing all this since full time AAP starts in 3rd) understand and others don’t. It’s not fair, especially with the transient nature of this area with lots of kids moving in and out, but that’s the business.

Additionally, Archer is an AAP center, so if that happens to be your neighborhood school, you won’t be able to be principal placed into AAP with high grades, unfortunately. So that’s another complicating factor.

Now for the somewhat good news, the difference between AAP and elementary gen ed in the core subject of ELA has blurred with the intro of the new ELA curriculum, Benchmark. There are lots of issues with Benchmark in the upper grades 3+, not going to get into that here. But AAP and Gen Ed are both using Benchmark. That leaves math as the main differentiator. I’m not sure how AAP centers do it or Louise Archer in particular. But at my kids’ LLIV school, they have kids switching class for math starting in 3rd when they start advanced math. Some schools start advanced math in 5th. So if the math grades and scores are good, you could try to push for inclusion in the advanced math portion and get the benefit of the main differentiator in the curriculum. But I’m not sure how much of an option this is at AAP centers because the rules are different vs. local AAP schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The mean is not the most trust worthy of descriptive statistics, it is easily influenced by outliers. The mode or median would give us a far better idea of what scores looked like. We know 3/4 of the kids in-pool are accepted into AAP and all of those kids, in the report that you have, scored 132 or higher on the exams given.

The stats you are using are older, I think close to 10 years old now. The in-pool test score today from a good number of schools is in the high 130’s to the mid 140’s. The parent referal scores from those schools are going to be in the 130s. That is true for at least three pyramids, McLean, Langley, and Oakton. I would not be surprised if the scores from Madison and Chantilly are in the high 130s to low 140s.

The 118 and 120s we hear about are outliers and outliers drive down the mean. I would guess the kids not in-pool today were more likely to be in the 125-135 range on their test scores, although we have pretty much zero data from the new exam to speculate about.

That said, a kid coming from a private school is likely to get into AAP with a WISC in the 129 range. That is not a score that is going to get an FCPS student during the first round or on appeal. A 129 is a great score but it is not a score that gets you into AAP in FCPS without some explanation or extenuating circumstances.

The screener tests are easily prepped. A lot of kids have very inflated scores due to prep, but they're not true 99th percentile kids. Fairfax is not that special and does not have 10x the number of statistically expected gifted kids. Most of the 132+ on CogAT/NGAT kids would have IQs in the 120s if they were tested with the WISC.

Or, to put things a different way, FCPS has around 2000 kids per grade level in AAP. They also have around 800 kids earn National merit commended and NMSF combined. This is after poaching the top kids from Loudoun, Arlington, etc. So, maybe 700 of those kids are true FCPS kids. Probably 100 of those were deemed "not good enough" for AAP (like my DD, who was a NMSF but not AAP worthy). So, let's assume that around 600 former AAP kids earn a national merit award. That's set at the national 97th percentile. This means that around 70% of the former AAP kids are not even in the national top 3%, even with all of the AAP programming and all of the PSAT prep.

A 129 WISC would put OP's kid above the median in AAP if they IQ tested all of the kids. But I agree that it's not a score that gets one into AAP, since they aren't especially focused on test scores.

[Anonymous]

Op, what did you submit for work samples?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your scores are good but not spectacular. The issue is it’s difficult for a kid coming in from outside the district - whether that’s a different public school district or private school - to get into AAP. The committee has a certain way that they want the recommendations and teacher forms filled out, that the 2nd grade FCPS teachers (who are the ones doing all this since full time AAP starts in 3rd) understand and others don’t. It’s not fair, especially with the transient nature of this area with lots of kids moving in and out, but that’s the business.

Additionally, Archer is an AAP center, so if that happens to be your neighborhood school, you won’t be able to be principal placed into AAP with high grades, unfortunately. So that’s another complicating factor.

Now for the somewhat good news, the difference between AAP and elementary gen ed in the core subject of ELA has blurred with the intro of the new ELA curriculum, Benchmark. There are lots of issues with Benchmark in the upper grades 3+, not going to get into that here. But AAP and Gen Ed are both using Benchmark. That leaves math as the main differentiator. I’m not sure how AAP centers do it or Louise Archer in particular. But at my kids’ LLIV school, they have kids switching class for math starting in 3rd when they start advanced math. Some schools start advanced math in 5th. So if the math grades and scores are good, you could try to push for inclusion in the advanced math portion and get the benefit of the main differentiator in the curriculum. But I’m not sure how much of an option this is at AAP centers because the rules are different vs. local AAP schools.

Np, curious to hear your thoughts on issues with benchmark in 3+. I know the lack of books/that it’s all excerpts (unless a teacher chooses to add a book) is one. Curious to hear others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your scores are good but not spectacular. The issue is it’s difficult for a kid coming in from outside the district - whether that’s a different public school district or private school - to get into AAP. The committee has a certain way that they want the recommendations and teacher forms filled out, that the 2nd grade FCPS teachers (who are the ones doing all this since full time AAP starts in 3rd) understand and others don’t. It’s not fair, especially with the transient nature of this area with lots of kids moving in and out, but that’s the business.

Additionally, Archer is an AAP center, so if that happens to be your neighborhood school, you won’t be able to be principal placed into AAP with high grades, unfortunately. So that’s another complicating factor.

Now for the somewhat good news, the difference between AAP and elementary gen ed in the core subject of ELA has blurred with the intro of the new ELA curriculum, Benchmark. There are lots of issues with Benchmark in the upper grades 3+, not going to get into that here. But AAP and Gen Ed are both using Benchmark. That leaves math as the main differentiator. I’m not sure how AAP centers do it or Louise Archer in particular. But at my kids’ LLIV school, they have kids switching class for math starting in 3rd when they start advanced math. Some schools start advanced math in 5th. So if the math grades and scores are good, you could try to push for inclusion in the advanced math portion and get the benefit of the main differentiator in the curriculum. But I’m not sure how much of an option this is at AAP centers because the rules are different vs. local AAP schools.

Np, curious to hear your thoughts on issues with benchmark in 3+. I know the lack of books/that it’s all excerpts (unless a teacher chooses to add a book) is one. Curious to hear others.

Yes, the lack of longer texts for kids who already know how to read (vs the younger kids who are still learning how to read) is a huge issue. It’s all the silly “excerpts” which is what they see on the SOL’s (and other state tests). It seems very shallow and teaching to the test. And it takes up A LOT of time - so they don’t even have time for novels and longer works. The excerpts are boring, not engaging to the kids, and the materials aren’t always the highest quality.

I also have a K student and I like the focus on phonics for the young students. I wish they could have done Benchmark for K-2 when the kids are still learning, and then something else that’s more challenging and engaging for the upper grades.

[Anonymous]

Got it re benchmark, agree.