How many dc with high WPPSI scores (98-99) did not get into Top 3 for Pre-K?

[Anonymous]

11:34. Sorry, PP spoke for herself better than I did! I like the point that reconciles the very low odds for unremarkable families, with the perception that people do know normal families at these schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:11:34. Sorry, PP spoke for herself better than I did! I like the point that reconciles the very low odds for unremarkable families, with the perception that people do know normal families at these schools.

My DC scored in the 99th percentile range, had great visits and recommendations and were accepted into all of the big three last year. The interesting part is that my DH and I are not what you would call remarkable. The twist is that we are aliens from the planet C-gutta. We were able to morph ourselves into being a prominent politician and local CEO and wowed the AD's and their staff. Shh...don't tell anyone!

[Anonymous]

Oh no, this idiot poster is back.

[Anonymous]

You think this is the "how does age affect admissions odds" poster?

[Anonymous]

Yup. You watch, pretty soon she'll start insulting people who don't agree with her.

[Anonymous]

In lieu of actual, you know, arguments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All this discussion is pretty weird and uncomfortable.

There are lots of great schools in the area - private, public, parochial etc. Everyone should take a breath and look for right fit. My son is in pre-K at Beauvoir and I think the class is full of bright and engaging children with a pretty broad range of family circumstances. Some very wealthy, alums, siblings etc.

I think this discussion puts too much emphasis on rationalization and finger pointing. Scores matter but not to the degree that you think. The ADs are looking for balanced and well-rounded childrens with a broad range of interests and personalities. Family wealth matters but again not to the extent that you think.

Yes, there are many schools to choose from. But for the parents of kids in the top percentiles, I think there is legitimate concern about whether there is actually a range of schools will fit their child's needs. A school catering to kids reading on grade level or a grade above will suit many, many kids, but it might not be a great fit for a child reading 2-5 years above grade level, a situation which could be the reality for many of the 99th percentile kids. Therefore, I think there is a bit of understandable panic among parents of some of these kids. DC public schools have a reputation for teaching below grade level, and some of the private schools aren't known for being academically challenging. So some parents with kids who crave academic challenge make the assumption that the top private schools are the best options for their children.

I do wonder to what extent schools think of the highest scores as possible negatives, since they don't necessarily want to have to differentiate for extreme learners. I certainly have heard about parental dissatisfaction with schools that say they challenge everyone but then provide basically the same material to everyone in the same grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All this discussion is pretty weird and uncomfortable. There are lots of great schools in the area - private, public, parochial etc. Everyone should take a breath and look for right fit. My son is in pre-K at Beauvoir and I think the class is full of bright and engaging children with a pretty broad range of family circumstances.

All easier to say and believe once you're inside the gate!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do wonder to what extent schools think of the highest scores as possible negatives, since they don't necessarily want to have to differentiate for extreme learners.

That might be true of a few off-the-charts kids, but based on my personal experience and many posts here, many of these 99th percentile kids actually seem to be bright but normal, not profoundly gifted, and not even all that far ahead of grade level (if at all).

[Anonymous]

Ditto.

[Anonymous]

Ditto ditto, and that would be my DS. bright but normal 99


I also find it interesting that many use reading levels as the (often only) litmus test for how gifted, profoundly gifted, and stratospherically gifted a preK/K child is. I suppose there aren't many other measures at this young age, but still.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ditto ditto, and that would be my DS. bright but normal 99


I also find it interesting that many use reading levels as the (often only) litmus test for how gifted, profoundly gifted, and stratospherically gifted a preK/K child is. I suppose there aren't many other measures at this young age, but still.[/quote

The problem with looking at a wisc or similar score for assessing giftedness is that the 99th percentile actually holds quite a variation of students. Some kids will score 99%ile and seem bright but not einstein-ish. Their parents thus assume that being 99%ile is normal/not unusual. However, there are a number of students who also test 99%ile but because they hit the test ceiling, they might actually be quite different intellectually. Hitting the test ceiling means that they answered all the Q's correct in a segment and the tester must stop. A child at the 99%ile could have an IQ of 140, let's say, or it could be much higher, like 160, but the parent/school will not know which is which unless further testing is done w/ out of level testing Qs. (Although I will say that parents often have an instinct about this...)

Reading is often a proxy for giftedness because it is the one thing that the parent/school can easily see. A parent notices when their 5 year old is reading the newspaper or other grown-up material. My DC was tested for reading comprehension/fluency in 2nd grade. DC scored on a 6th grade level (this was as far as the elementary assessment went). From the school's perspective there is no other measure because the public school doesn't do the WISC type testing, and achievement type testing can be a hit or miss measure of giftedness because achievement often depends on what the child is interested in or exposed to.

A careful reading of a WISC subscore sheet will reveal the 99%ile from the 99.9%ile tester who hit several subtest ceilings. The latter might not be so easy to deal with in a private school setting because of an inability (or unwillingness) to differentiate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All this discussion is pretty weird and uncomfortable.

There are lots of great schools in the area - private, public, parochial etc. Everyone should take a breath and look for right fit. My son is in pre-K at Beauvoir and I think the class is full of bright and engaging children with a pretty broad range of family circumstances. Some very wealthy, alums, siblings etc.

I think this discussion puts too much emphasis on rationalization and finger pointing. Scores matter but not to the degree that you think. The ADs are looking for balanced and well-rounded childrens with a broad range of interests and personalities. Family wealth matters but again not to the extent that you think.

Yes, there are many schools to choose from. But for the parents of kids in the top percentiles, I think there is legitimate concern about whether there is actually a range of schools will fit their child's needs. A school catering to kids reading on grade level or a grade above will suit many, many kids, but it might not be a great fit for a child reading 2-5 years above grade level, a situation which could be the reality for many of the 99th percentile kids. Therefore, I think there is a bit of understandable panic among parents of some of these kids. DC public schools have a reputation for teaching below grade level, and some of the private schools aren't known for being academically challenging. So some parents with kids who crave academic challenge make the assumption that the top private schools are the best options for their children.

I do wonder to what extent schools think of the highest scores as possible negatives, since they don't necessarily want to have to differentiate for extreme learners. I certainly have heard about parental dissatisfaction with schools that say they challenge everyone but then provide basically the same material to everyone in the same grade.

I think it's a matter of how you define "needs." Children obviously shouldn't be bored, but it is not a given that children "need" all of the things that these schools offer (gorgeous facilities, prestige), or that schools with less dazzling reputations are less equipped to prepare a highly-motivated student. It's not plausible that the teachers in the less well-known schools can't stay a few steps ahead of a very bright 4th-grade or even 12th-grade student.

The smartest, most awe-inspiring students I went to college (Brown U) with were not independent school graduates (I was). The crazy-smart math guy who won every PhD fellowship went to an NYC public school; many other examples like that across the university. What stood out was that there were so many of us from independent schools-- but we really weren't any better prepared, or any smarter. Don't get me wrong00 I think that all of these schools are very good, and worth applying to. But seriously, the hypothetical child who is simply "too bright" for a lesser-known independent school but not "too bright" for Sidwell probably doesn't exist.

[Anonymous]

My DC (now 4) hit a few subtest ceilings but is still not composing symphonies, doing calculus, or reading Tolstoy. Her reading level is on par with at least a few others in her class. In fact, DC expressed interest in chess yesterday but gave up after about 10 minutes and decided she would try again when she was older (it probably didn't help that I don't really remember the rules). So you can hit the ceilings and still not be abnormally bright.

[Anonymous]

She is probably "abnormally bright" compared to the average 4-year-old. The fact that you mentioned her reading suggests that...