NNAT question pattern

[Anonymous]

When is the test being administered this year? Just curious. My child's gonna do what she's gonna do -- I'm not prepping her.

[Anonymous]

Should be this month for first-graders, PP.

[Anonymous]

Here is one line of thought on 'prepping' for NNAT.

Talking to the child about what kind of questions to expect, can certainly help prevent total blow ups ( Mommy I just did not understand what was I supposed to do).

But, after seeing some of my fellow Tiger Mom's trying to prep they child - I am a 100% sure that overall score will not change that much. If you child is a 99% one, then that is what he or she will get.

But if your child is a 85% caliber ( which is great in itself), its nearly impossible to prep this child to get a 99%.

And I strongly believe that the parent should talk to the child about what to expect in these test. I have no faith in the ability of FCPS to deliver consistent clear instructions to all the kids. There will be one teacher who is not clear enough and as luck would have it - your child will be in that class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is one line of thought on 'prepping' for NNAT.

Talking to the child about what kind of questions to expect, can certainly help prevent total blow ups ( Mommy I just did not understand what was I supposed to do).

But, after seeing some of my fellow Tiger Mom's trying to prep they child - I am a 100% sure that overall score will not change that much. If you child is a 99% one, then that is what he or she will get.

But if your child is a 85% caliber ( which is great in itself), its nearly impossible to prep this child to get a 99%.
And I strongly believe that the parent should talk to the child about what to expect in these test. I have no faith in the ability of FCPS to deliver consistent clear instructions to all the kids. There will be one teacher who is not clear enough and as luck would have it - your child will be in that class.

These kind of generalizations, without any supporting data are an insult to everyone's intelligence. Without a "prepped" group and a control group, and a measure between, you cannot make this kind of statement and present it as fact. Try, "in my limited opinion which is not substatiated by any marginally scientific data" as a preface next time.

As to my personal experience, I have now prepped two of my children for the NNAT and both have done outstanding. When they began the practice tests, their scores were good, missing 6 or 7 questions out of 39 or so. By the time we were done, they recognized patterns of questions (there are only so many ways to show patterns on a line, a checker board with a missing piece, etc.) knew a process of eliminating wrong answers first and closely studing the last two, when to guess, when to skip a question that was taking too long (but never leaving a blank), etc. At that point they were missing only an occasional answer. While I would agree that moving a 25%'er to 99% is a tall task, my personal experience (not scientific) is that the prep made my initially good performing kids confident and ready, and with excellent results. I agree with the Tiger Mom who said what is right for your family is fine, and what is right for hers (and mine) is our business. I could not care less if my kid “skews” the test because he was prepared and worked hard to do well. In our family, the importance of hard work, preparation, and good study habits are stressed, and if they just happen to lead to good performance so be it. There are many cultures that stress this these habits and others that do not, and I think the results speak for themselves.

[Anonymous]

PP: The problem is the effort to prep them did not make them smarter, better adjusted, or more capable. Ok...more capable for taking standardized tests.

That might be sufficient in some cultures, but it stifles creativity.

[Anonymous]

So who kept their first grader home today to cram? I would have, but I really needed a massage and a manicure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP: The problem is the effort to prep them did not make them smarter, better adjusted, or more capable. Ok...more capable for taking standardized tests.

That might be sufficient in some cultures, but it stifles creativity.

How does it stifle creativity? I must have missed your link to a study.

More capable for taking standardized tests = better score on standardized test = greater chance of admission to those schools using standardized test as admission criteria. That is the topic of this thread, not measuring creativity, whatever that means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:...In our family, the importance of hard work, preparation, and good study habits are stressed, and if they just happen to lead to good performance so be it...

i'm sure you'd value hard work regardless he's getting AAP education or not, true? so that's really irrelevant to this discussion.

the only goal of you prepping them was to get into AAP, but why? because you knew they need AAP or because AAP is superior in your view?

[Anonymous]

Chopping wood and running on a tread mill is hard work. However, hard work toward a goal, or to better oneself is our idea here.

As far as AAP goes, it is a far better program than the gutted out general cirriculum geared to those who have not left for AAP. Much broader in scope, individual pace, and intellectural stimulation. Better teachers too. Do you think it is worthwhile to study hard, get good grades and get into Harvard rather than State U? While there are successful graduates of both schools, I would venture to guess that the long-term track record for all graduates of Harvard (be it social workers, CEOs, or MDs regardless of income) eclipses that of State U grads. (not scientific, just a guess) Better schools make better achievers.

But again, everyone is different and undoubtedly many parents will feel pressuring their kids will destroy their psyches rather than building their confidence and achievement.

[Anonymous]

Good grades and high test scores are not enough to get into Harvard. Kids who get into Harvard are passionate about and spend hours and hours each week on all sorts of extracurricular activities. They have time for all those extracurriculars because they don't have to work hard for their grades and test scores.
State Universities admit solely by grades and test scores, but Harvard does not. You have to bring a lot more to the table to get into Harvard than a 4.0 and 2400 SATs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good grades and high test scores are not enough to get into Harvard. Kids who get into Harvard are passionate about and spend hours and hours each week on all sorts of extracurricular activities. They have time for all those extracurriculars because they don't have to work hard for their grades and test scores.
State Universities admit solely by grades and test scores, but Harvard does not. You have to bring a lot more to the table to get into Harvard than a 4.0 and 2400 SATs.

Not sure I see the relevance of your comment. Point was, those who graduate from better schools (and better programs such as AAP) set the table for future success. Hard work upfront gives one a better chance of admission. While I agree that extracurriculars are part of the admission process at good schools, they are probably a distant third, after grades and standardized scores. Playing varsity tennis and working at the soup kitchen on holidays makes one well rounded, but by looking at the average admissions SAT and GPA of the Ivy schools, I am sure you can see that those who get in have first shown they are academically superior, many, like myself, by busting their asses studying.

I am sure that the majority of the students at TJ would take great offense to your comment that "they have time for all those extracurriculars because they don't have to work hard for their grades and test scores". Do you really know anything about the work load associated with achieving a 4.0 at a top high school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chopping wood and running on a tread mill is hard work. However, hard work toward a goal, or to better oneself is our idea here.

As far as AAP goes, it is a far better program than the gutted out general cirriculum geared to those who have not left for AAP. Much broader in scope, individual pace, and intellectural stimulation. Better teachers too. Do you think it is worthwhile to study hard, get good grades and get into Harvard rather than State U? While there are successful graduates of both schools, I would venture to guess that the long-term track record for all graduates of Harvard (be it social workers, CEOs, or MDs regardless of income) eclipses that of State U grads. (not scientific, just a guess) Better schools make better achievers.

But again, everyone is different and undoubtedly many parents will feel pressuring their kids will destroy their psyches rather than building their confidence and achievement.

good, as long as we established that you did it because you believe AAP program is superior i'm fine with it. i only have problems with those who prep because they think their kids are gifted and "belong" in AAP - that's cheating in my books.

[Anonymous]

good, as long as we established that you did it because you believe AAP program is superior i'm fine with it. i only have problems with those who prep because they think their kids are gifted and "belong" in AAP - that's cheating in my books.

This doesn't make any sense to me. Anyone who preps their kid for this test must think BOTH of these things: AAP is a superior program, AND their child belongs in AAP. Why would you prep if you didn't think your kid belonged in AAP? AAP is supposed to be for gifted kids - if you are prepping your child for a test to get him into a gifted program, you must think he is gifted, no? The alternative line of reasoning is something like "my kid isn't gifted and doesn't really belong in the program, but I want to prep for the test and get him in there with all the gifted kids because it's such a great program."

It seems you should be opposed to test prep across the board or not at all. How can you decide based on the parent's motivation for prepping, that one motivation is fine and the other is "cheating?"

I'm not opposed to test prep, btw. I don't care how much or little other people prep their kids. I care only how my child does on the test, and I don't think other kids prepping affects that. The percentile scores are nationally scaled. A very small group of these kids are prepped, and that is not going to affect the national percentiles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

good, as long as we established that you did it because you believe AAP program is superior i'm fine with it. i only have problems with those who prep because they think their kids are gifted and "belong" in AAP - that's cheating in my books.

This doesn't make any sense to me. Anyone who preps their kid for this test must think BOTH of these things: AAP is a superior program, AND their child belongs in AAP. Why would you prep if you didn't think your kid belonged in AAP? AAP is supposed to be for gifted kids - if you are prepping your child for a test to get him into a gifted program, you must think he is gifted, no? The alternative line of reasoning is something like "my kid isn't gifted and doesn't really belong in the program, but I want to prep for the test and get him in there with all the gifted kids because it's such a great program."

I prepped my child and I do not know if he is gifted or not. However, if he does not score well enough after being well prepared, then I would say he should not be in the program. Also, it is important to note that the program is an "advanced academic program" (AAP) and no longer "gifted" (GT). Big distinction that opens it up to a much larger pool.

It seems you should be opposed to test prep across the board or not at all. How can you decide based on the parent's motivation for prepping, that one motivation is fine and the other is "cheating?"

I'm not opposed to test prep, btw. I don't care how much or little other people prep their kids. I care only how my child does on the test, and I don't think other kids prepping affects that. The percentile scores are nationally scaled. A very small group of these kids are prepped, and that is not going to affect the national percentiles.

I am sure a small group of prepped kids will not affect the scores on a national basis, but I would venture to say they affect the scores within their group in a positive manner. Hence the benefit to them of prepping.

[Anonymous]

I gave my kids minimal prep so that they get familar with the type of questions and what to expect.
One got 160 perfect score (I was amazed). One got 147 I think (missed 2 I think). One got 151 (missed 2 but higher score due to birthday).

I did what I think is best for my kids, and they are doing great in AAP with minimal help.