GBRS - Did it change your view?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of us are biased into thinking your kids are gifted. We should be biased in favor of our children. I admitted to the 2nd grade teacher that I believe that my DD belonged in AAP, but admitted my bias. I gave her every chance to tell me that she did not think DD was as smart as I think she is. The teacher encouraged me to parental refer (DD missed the pool by about 10 points). She is doing well in AAP now in the fifth grade.

We should love our children and want the best for them. That doesn't preclude being objective about their strengths and weaknesses so we can guide them appropriately and be their best advocate. You clearly are convinced that parents can't be objective in assessing their kids and that teachers know best. That's a perfectly fine way of thinking and works for you. I don't think that being biased helps my kids. I think loving them and being very actively involved in all aspects of their lives including their education, yet being objective lets me help them build on their strengths and work on their weaknesses, which all children have. You clearly know what works best in your situation and that's good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, and that is why the GBRS is filled out by a team of educators and not just by one person. As part of the application package, it helps to provide a more complete picture of a child, beyond simple test scores. It gives the committee a "look" at the individual child in class during the school day. The parent can provide similar information about the child at home with the parent questionnaire.

My response was to the blanket statement about teachers being more qualified than parents to assess. My only point is that that's not always the case and parent input is important. Just as there are crappy doctors, lawyers...there are crappy teachers. Also, the second grade teacher has the most input and provides the samples that the team of educators uses to make the determination. If he/she provides negative feedback, being the one with the most contact with the child, no one will override him/her on the team. But apparently the teams at your school work perfectly, if we all were so lucky.

This was posted in another thread, but has good information:

The GBRSw/C is a record of observable classroom behaviors. It is not a recommendation or favorable support for or against full-time AAP placement or for other advanced academic services.

The local school screening committee consists of at least three of the following: a teacher who works with the student, the advanced academic resource teacher, an administrator, English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) teacher, and other specialists as needed. The local school committee completes the GBRSw/C and prepares screening files for all second grade pool candidates, as well as referrals.


Just some information from the FCPS parent AAP info package. The GBRS has input from at least three staff members.

Yes, parent input is certainly important, that is why the parent questionnaire is an important part of the package.

I frequently read on here that only one teacher writes the GBRS and can have a bias and unduly influence the child's application package, but it is important to note that there must be at least three members of the local committee. At our school, one of the members might be the child's first grade or kindergarten teacher in addition to thesecond grade teacher, so people who have seen the child in the classroom for a length of time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, and that is why the GBRS is filled out by a team of educators and not just by one person. As part of the application package, it helps to provide a more complete picture of a child, beyond simple test scores. It gives the committee a "look" at the individual child in class during the school day. The parent can provide similar information about the child at home with the parent questionnaire.

My response was to the blanket statement about teachers being more qualified than parents to assess. My only point is that that's not always the case and parent input is important. Just as there are crappy doctors, lawyers...there are crappy teachers. Also, the second grade teacher has the most input and provides the samples that the team of educators uses to make the determination. If he/she provides negative feedback, being the one with the most contact with the child, no one will override him/her on the team. But apparently the teams at your school work perfectly, if we all were so lucky.

This was posted in another thread, but has good information:

The GBRSw/C is a record of observable classroom behaviors. It is not a recommendation or favorable support for or against full-time AAP placement or for other advanced academic services.

The local school screening committee consists of at least three of the following: a teacher who works with the student, the advanced academic resource teacher, an administrator, English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) teacher, and other specialists as needed. The local school committee completes the GBRSw/C and prepares screening files for all second grade pool candidates, as well as referrals.


Just some information from the FCPS parent AAP info package. The GBRS has input from at least three staff members.

Yes, parent input is certainly important, that is why the parent questionnaire is an important part of the package.

I frequently read on here that only one teacher writes the GBRS and can have a bias and unduly influence the child's application package, but it is important to note that there must be at least three members of the local committee. At our school, one of the members might be the child's first grade or kindergarten teacher in addition to thesecond grade teacher, so people who have seen the child in the classroom for a length of time.

We were told at the aap meeting in January that first grade teachers don't provide a lot of input.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of us are biased into thinking your kids are gifted. We should be biased in favor of our children. I admitted to the 2nd grade teacher that I believe that my DD belonged in AAP, but admitted my bias. I gave her every chance to tell me that she did not think DD was as smart as I think she is. The teacher encouraged me to parental refer (DD missed the pool by about 10 points). She is doing well in AAP now in the fifth grade.

We should love our children and want the best for them. That doesn't preclude being objective about their strengths and weaknesses so we can guide them appropriately and be their best advocate. You clearly are convinced that parents can't be objective in assessing their kids and that teachers know best. That's a perfectly fine way of thinking and works for you. I don't think that being biased helps my kids. I think loving them and being very actively involved in all aspects of their lives including their education, yet being objective lets me help them build on their strengths and work on their weaknesses, which all children have. You clearly know what works best in your situation and that's good.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of us are biased into thinking your kids are gifted. We should be biased in favor of our children. I admitted to the 2nd grade teacher that I believe that my DD belonged in AAP, but admitted my bias. I gave her every chance to tell me that she did not think DD was as smart as I think she is. The teacher encouraged me to parental refer (DD missed the pool by about 10 points). She is doing well in AAP now in the fifth grade.

We should love our children and want the best for them. That doesn't preclude being objective about their strengths and weaknesses so we can guide them appropriately and be their best advocate. You clearly are convinced that parents can't be objective in assessing their kids and that teachers know best. That's a perfectly fine way of thinking and works for you. I don't think that being biased helps my kids. I think loving them and being very actively involved in all aspects of their lives including their education, yet being objective lets me help them build on their strengths and work on their weaknesses, which all children have. You clearly know what works best in your situation and that's good.

I agree with this, and it is not inconsistent with what I posted above. What I am saying, though I I think most parents thing there kids are smart. I know I do, I interact with her all the time...she asks me questions or will make comments that show hidden brilliance. But, I do not know if every kid does this. I should be an advocate for my child. I am not pushing her, she can do what she wants with her life. But I don't want her to be held back by my preconceptions. As such, Yes I think my DD belongs in AAP. I think he belongs in TJ (though am concerned over the commute time). I advocate for her strongly. I can not imagine a parent saying to the kid, "You are not smart enough for AAP". That kid will believe it, and will think they are not as smart as they may be. It is like the old grace, Math is Hard. Not in my house it isn't

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But, they remain eminently more qualified than you. You're viewing your child through a parent lense. They're viewing your child with more detachment. They also have formal education and experience and the ability to make relative comparisons to a broader range of children. Or, more simply, you bring biases, they don't. So, again, their input and evaluation of your child is more valuable than your own.

All but the very newest teachers have seen many, many children in the classroom setting and over longer spans of time. They may not be perfect (who is?), but they bring their background and experience to the table when observing the students in their classes. Their perspectives are a valuable addition to the screening process.

Yes, their input is helpful in the screening process, but they are not always right or always qualified. That's why there needs to be a balance so when you have someone who for whatever reason isn't up to the task, a child's future isn't adversely impacted.

Sure, but let's be clear: The parent's view is not the appropriate counterbalance. Too much confirmation bias.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GBRS made me realize that the teacher just wasn't getting DC. I thought I was crazy because my perception of DC was so different than hers. The WISC showed me that I was right all along about DC, that DC really was smart. Not bitter at teacher... it just made me realize that these teachers aren't experts in picking out 'gifted' behaviors. They don't have any training in this. They are teachers, trying to do the best they can.

True, of course, they have more experience and expertise in identifying gifted behavior than you do, so there's that.

Don't agree. My DC's first grade teacher was a second year teacher who could barely handle the class. She ended up leaving at the end of the school year, can't say she was more qualified. Also, first and second year teachers were not uncommon in DC's school. They are young and straight out of college just trying to get a hang of teaching, no I don't trust their qualification to identify gifted behavior.

But, they remain eminently more qualified than you. You're viewing your child through a parent lense. They're viewing your child with more detachment. They also have formal education and experience and the ability to make relative comparisons to a broader range of children. Or, more simply, you bring biases, they don't. So, again, their input and evaluation of your child is more valuable than your own.

Just because you are biased re: your kids doesn't mean every one is. I am very objective about my DCs , I spend a lot of time with them academically and know their strengths and weaknesses very well. DS's K and second grade teachers were more qualified than I was to decide, first grade teacher, no way. That is the problem with the GBRS, it's luck of the draw. This is also not sour grapes DS got 15 GBRS.

Whoa there, lady. You're extremely biased, to the point where you're not evening listening to what the teacher is communicating to you and having your view of the teacher CHANGED because s/he dared to not conform with your lofty notions of your child's abilities.

I, too, know my childrens' academic strengths and weaknesses. While I didn't have to advocate for them getting into the gifted program (they did that on their own), this town is full of children whose parents push bright children into advanced curriculums where they don't necessarily belong, largely out of desire to secure advantage for their child. A low GBRS is very telling. You can go in and argue it until you're blue in the face -- and something tells me you will -- but generally those impressions are pretty accurate and are overlooked only to appease an overzealous parent. So, if you want to be one of "those" parents, at least own it. Don't posture about how you're objective about your children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GBRS made me realize that the teacher just wasn't getting DC. I thought I was crazy because my perception of DC was so different than hers. The WISC showed me that I was right all along about DC, that DC really was smart. Not bitter at teacher... it just made me realize that these teachers aren't experts in picking out 'gifted' behaviors. They don't have any training in this. They are teachers, trying to do the best they can.

True, of course, they have more experience and expertise in identifying gifted behavior than you do, so there's that.

Don't agree. My DC's first grade teacher was a second year teacher who could barely handle the class. She ended up leaving at the end of the school year, can't say she was more qualified. Also, first and second year teachers were not uncommon in DC's school. They are young and straight out of college just trying to get a hang of teaching, no I don't trust their qualification to identify gifted behavior.

But, they remain eminently more qualified than you. You're viewing your child through a parent lense. They're viewing your child with more detachment. They also have formal education and experience and the ability to make relative comparisons to a broader range of children. Or, more simply, you bring biases, they don't. So, again, their input and evaluation of your child is more valuable than your own.

Just because you are biased re: your kids doesn't mean every one is. I am very objective about my DCs , I spend a lot of time with them academically and know their strengths and weaknesses very well. DS's K and second grade teachers were more qualified than I was to decide, first grade teacher, no way. That is the problem with the GBRS, it's luck of the draw. This is also not sour grapes DS got 15 GBRS.

Whoa there, lady. You're extremely biased, to the point where you're not evening listening to what the teacher is communicating to you and having your view of the teacher CHANGED because s/he dared to not conform with your lofty notions of your child's abilities.

I, too, know my childrens' academic strengths and weaknesses. While I didn't have to advocate for them getting into the gifted program (they did that on their own), this town is full of children whose parents push bright children into advanced curriculums where they don't necessarily belong, largely out of desire to secure advantage for their child. A low GBRS is very telling. You can go in and argue it until you're blue in the face -- and something tells me you will -- but generally those impressions are pretty accurate and are overlooked only to appease an overzealous parent. So, if you want to be one of "those" parents, at least own it. Don't posture about how you're objective about your children.

I won't be one of "those" parents because if you read the entire thread all I said was GBRS isn't always accurate because some teachers aren't qualified and I gave as an example my DS's first grade teacher who could barely handle the class and ended up leaving at the end of the year. DS had a 15 GBRS and is in AAP without me having to advocate for him and didn't have to get WISC. My only point was deferring to a low GBRS when there are high NNAT and CogAt scores isn't always the best. Teachers aren't infallible. People always assume that if a parent disagrees with the GBRS he/she is being one of "those" parent and that's not always the case. You are also assuming the post you bolded was from the pp who said she got the WISC because of low GBRS. It's not. Anyway, there are always going to be people who assume that a low GBRS is more accurate that two tests and the parent's observation of their child. I say, teachers are humans and if your child has high scores and you've seen how quickly your child gets things beyond their level, then advocate for your child, get the WISC and see if it supports you observations. I think there are too many cases posted here of high NNAT, CogAt, and WISC but low GBRS for me to assume that whenever a parent disagrees with the GBRS he/she is one of "those" parent. I clearly will not convinced anyone who thinks that the GBRS is always accurate that it's not always the case, so I'll bow out at this point.

[Anonymous]

You definitely sound like one of "those" parents, 8:08.

[Anonymous]

It's not that the GBRS is always accurate, it is just that it is one part of the application, each part giving a different look at the child, with the goal being to place the child in the most suitable learning environment for that child. It's a valuable part of the package, just as the test scores and parent questionnaire and work samples are also valuable. Each part helps the committee in determining the needs of the child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You definitely sound like one of "those" parents, 8:08.

Okay, you're right, if someone's child has high NNAT, CogAt, and WISC , they should ignore all of those and defer to the GBRS because otherwise you are one of "those" parents. And if your child has a high GBRS and you think it's okay for a parent of a child with high scores on all 3 tests to question the GBRS then you are one of "those" parents, sounds entirely logical to me

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You definitely sound like one of "those" parents, 8:08.

Okay, you're right, if someone's child has high NNAT, CogAt, and WISC , they should ignore all of those and defer to the GBRS because otherwise you are one of "those" parents. And if your child has a high GBRS and you think it's okay for a parent of a child with high scores on all 3 tests to question the GBRS then you are one of "those" parents, sounds entirely logical to me

To be fair, no one is saying the they should "defer" to the GBRS, only that the GBRS adds value to the process. It is only one part of the application package, along with the test scores, the parent input, and work samples from school and home.

The child spends about six hours a day at school, so it does make sense to look at his/her behavior during those hours when deciding on a classroom placement that fits the child's learning needs. And the people who are there and see the child the most during school hours are the teachers.

[Anonymous]

GBRS is highly subjective. The same kid will guaranteed get different GBRS scores if they are with different teacher's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You definitely sound like one of "those" parents, 8:08.

Okay, you're right, if someone's child has high NNAT, CogAt, and WISC , they should ignore all of those and defer to the GBRS because otherwise you are one of "those" parents. And if your child has a high GBRS and you think it's okay for a parent of a child with high scores on all 3 tests to question the GBRS then you are one of "those" parents, sounds entirely logical to me

To be fair, no one is saying the they should "defer" to the GBRS, only that the GBRS adds value to the process. It is only one part of the application package, along with the test scores, the parent input, and work samples from school and home.

The child spends about six hours a day at school, so it does make sense to look at his/her behavior during those hours when deciding on a classroom placement that fits the child's learning needs. And the people who are there and see the child the most during school hours are the teachers.

Actually someone was criticized for saying the GBRS in her child's case wasn't an accurate reflection of her child based on the three tests and her observations. I am in no way advocating that the GBRS isn't valuable, I think it is really important, I just don't like the "those" parent label placed on anyone who thinks the GBRS is not a good reflection of their child's abilities. Classes are full, some teachers are new, some really gifted kids are shy.....There are a lot of variables that could result in a GBRS not being a good measure of a "child's "giftedness" so I think GBRS is very valuable but not in every case an accurate judge of the child's giftedness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

To be fair, no one is saying the they should "defer" to the GBRS, only that the GBRS adds value to the process. It is only one part of the application package, along with the test scores, the parent input, and work samples from school and home.

The child spends about six hours a day at school, so it does make sense to look at his/her behavior during those hours when deciding on a classroom placement that fits the child's learning needs. And the people who are there and see the child the most during school hours are the teachers.

Anonymous wrote:
Actually someone was criticized for saying the GBRS in her child's case wasn't an accurate reflection of her child based on the three tests and her observations. I am in no way advocating that the GBRS isn't valuable, I think it is really important, I just don't like the "those" parent label placed on anyone who thinks the GBRS is not a good reflection of their child's abilities. Classes are full, some teachers are new, some really gifted kids are shy.....There are a lot of variables that could result in a GBRS not being a good measure of a "child's "giftedness" so I think GBRS is very valuable but not in every case an accurate judge of the child's giftedness.

I think each part of the package is very valuable but has the possibility of being not accurate in any particular child's case. That is why FCPS doesn't use only one item in the application to determine a good fit for each child.

Looking at test scores, work samples, parent input, and the GBRS allow the committee to see various facets of how the child learns. Any of the other parts of the application could also give an inaccurate picture of the child's abilities and that is why they don't look at only test scores, or only work samples, or only parent input, or only teacher input.

If they relied on only one way of looking at the child, they might see a highly inaccurate picture. Looking at the application as a whole fills out the picture and helps to present a closer to accurate picture. Still not perfect, of course, because nothing is, but doing the best they can with the data they can gather.