Do aap teachers look at the test scores once the kids are in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When I asked re: my daughter's scores of xx, I got a real snippy response. To which I said, "If you're saying her score is too low, can you assure me that no other child will get in with a lower score?"

Huh?

[Anonymous]

Huh back!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Huh back!

Why would anyone have to guarantee you anything?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I asked re: my daughter's scores of xx, I got a real snippy response. To which I said, "If you're saying her score is too low, can you assure me that no other child will get in with a lower score?"

Huh?

A higher GBRS might do the trick!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a third grade teacher, and I usually hear from our AART at some point about which students are parent/teacher referrals and which students qualify on their own. It's pretty rare though[u] that there is a kid we all know has no business being in who was pushed through by a savvy parent.

Either the admission process is a farce (in which case, a "savvy parent" can push a child through) OR the admission process is legitimate and therefore only kids who qualify get through. Which is it?

If there are 6+ people approving each child who is admitted in addition to standardized test scores, then tell me how, exactly, is a parent able to push their undeserving child through?

Isn't it possible to have a third option: mistakes slip through the cracks. Doctors inadvertently don't diagnose a malignancy. Lawyers forget to file an important document on time. A kid is approved when he shouldn't be. (By "shouldn't be," that could be defined as him having an amazingly high IQ but zero ability to do the work (maybe OCD, maybe lazy, maybe high anxiety,etc.) - so reasonable minds could differ as to whether the kid should be in. Regardless. it isn't as black and white as you're trying to make it. Since the teacher said it is "rare" this occurs, why on earth would you think the admission process is a farce?

That sounds like one of those highly gifted kids the program was designed to serve. AAP is not an achievement program. Those kids do fine on their own. This is what has ruined gifted learning in FCPS.

Not to me. I shudder to think of an entire class of kids who can't get the work done. Some, yes. All? No.

Then I guess it's good you're not a teacher for the gifted in FCPS. These teachers get a lot of the quirks that often come with the brilliance. They also know that these kids, properly guided actually do very well with appropriate curriculums.

What I shudder at is the image of a bunch of precious achievers hogging resources meant for truly gifted kids and turning the neighborhood school system upside down to do it.

[Anonymous]

What I shudder at is the image of a bunch of precious achievers hogging resources meant for truly gifted kids and turning the neighborhood school system upside down to do it.

Cripes, give it a rest. And see a doctor about that shudder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a third grade teacher, and I usually hear from our AART at some point about which students are parent/teacher referrals and which students qualify on their own. It's pretty rare though[u] that there is a kid we all know has no business being in who was pushed through by a savvy parent.

Either the admission process is a farce (in which case, a "savvy parent" can push a child through) OR the admission process is legitimate and therefore only kids who qualify get through. Which is it?

If there are 6+ people approving each child who is admitted in addition to standardized test scores, then tell me how, exactly, is a parent able to push their undeserving child through?

Isn't it possible to have a third option: mistakes slip through the cracks. Doctors inadvertently don't diagnose a malignancy. Lawyers forget to file an important document on time. A kid is approved when he shouldn't be. (By "shouldn't be," that could be defined as him having an amazingly high IQ but zero ability to do the work (maybe OCD, maybe lazy, maybe high anxiety,etc.) - so reasonable minds could differ as to whether the kid should be in. Regardless. it isn't as black and white as you're trying to make it. Since the teacher said it is "rare" this occurs, why on earth would you think the admission process is a farce?

That sounds like one of those highly gifted kids the program was designed to serve. AAP is not an achievement program. Those kids do fine on their own. This is what has ruined gifted learning in FCPS.

Not to me. I shudder to think of an entire class of kids who can't get the work done. Some, yes. All? No.

Then I guess it's good you're not a teacher for the gifted in FCPS. These teachers get a lot of the quirks that often come with the brilliance. They also know that these kids, properly guided actually do very well with appropriate curriculums.

What I shudder at is the image of a bunch of precious achievers hogging resources meant for truly gifted kids and turning the neighborhood school system upside down to do it.

Yes, the above exactly describes the kids that gifted programs are meant for. Gifted programs are meant for kids whose needs are not being served in the regular classroom. It is meant to be about the educational needs of children, not simply an opportunity to get ahead of others. Early gifted programs spent a lot of time dealing with the social and emotional needs of gifted kids while also presenting academic challenges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a third grade teacher, and I usually hear from our AART at some point about which students are parent/teacher referrals and which students qualify on their own. It's pretty rare though[u] that there is a kid we all know has no business being in who was pushed through by a savvy parent.

Either the admission process is a farce (in which case, a "savvy parent" can push a child through) OR the admission process is legitimate and therefore only kids who qualify get through. Which is it?

If there are 6+ people approving each child who is admitted in addition to standardized test scores, then tell me how, exactly, is a parent able to push their undeserving child through?

Isn't it possible to have a third option: mistakes slip through the cracks. Doctors inadvertently don't diagnose a malignancy. Lawyers forget to file an important document on time. A kid is approved when he shouldn't be. (By "shouldn't be," that could be defined as him having an amazingly high IQ but zero ability to do the work (maybe OCD, maybe lazy, maybe high anxiety,etc.) - so reasonable minds could differ as to whether the kid should be in. Regardless. it isn't as black and white as you're trying to make it. Since the teacher said it is "rare" this occurs, why on earth would you think the admission process is a farce?

That sounds like one of those highly gifted kids the program was designed to serve. AAP is not an achievement program. Those kids do fine on their own. This is what has ruined gifted learning in FCPS.

Not to me. I shudder to think of an entire class of kids who can't get the work done. Some, yes. All? No.

Then I guess it's good you're not a teacher for the gifted in FCPS. These teachers get a lot of the quirks that often come with the brilliance. They also know that these kids, properly guided actually do very well with appropriate curriculums.

What I shudder at is the image of a bunch of precious achievers hogging resources meant for truly gifted kids and turning the neighborhood school system upside down to do it.

I pay taxes just like the parents of gifted kids, so I'm ok with my "precious achiever" hogging resources

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a third grade teacher, and I usually hear from our AART at some point about which students are parent/teacher referrals and which students qualify on their own. It's pretty rare though[u] that there is a kid we all know has no business being in who was pushed through by a savvy parent.

Either the admission process is a farce (in which case, a "savvy parent" can push a child through) OR the admission process is legitimate and therefore only kids who qualify get through. Which is it?

If there are 6+ people approving each child who is admitted in addition to standardized test scores, then tell me how, exactly, is a parent able to push their undeserving child through?

Isn't it possible to have a third option: mistakes slip through the cracks. Doctors inadvertently don't diagnose a malignancy. Lawyers forget to file an important document on time. A kid is approved when he shouldn't be. (By "shouldn't be," that could be defined as him having an amazingly high IQ but zero ability to do the work (maybe OCD, maybe lazy, maybe high anxiety,etc.) - so reasonable minds could differ as to whether the kid should be in. Regardless. it isn't as black and white as you're trying to make it. Since the teacher said it is "rare" this occurs, why on earth would you think the admission process is a farce?

That sounds like one of those highly gifted kids the program was designed to serve. AAP is not an achievement program. Those kids do fine on their own. This is what has ruined gifted learning in FCPS.

Not to me. I shudder to think of an entire class of kids who can't get the work done. Some, yes. All? No.

Then I guess it's good you're not a teacher for the gifted in FCPS. These teachers get a lot of the quirks that often come with the brilliance. They also know that these kids, properly guided actually do very well with appropriate curriculums.

What I shudder at is the image of a bunch of precious achievers hogging resources meant for truly gifted kids and turning the neighborhood school system upside down to do it.

Yes, the above exactly describes the kids that gifted programs are meant for. Gifted programs are meant for kids whose needs are not being served in the regular classroom. It is meant to be about the educational needs of children, not simply an opportunity to get ahead of others. Early gifted programs spent a lot of time dealing with the social and emotional needs of gifted kids while also presenting academic challenges.

Really? My well behaved kid has a 145 IQ. I thought the program was for her, too. Thanks for the correction! My point above was that an entire class of kids who are easily distracted, talkative, disruptive, etc., would be draining for the teacher and extremely disruptive for other kids.