Number of AAP-eligible kids -- Fewer this year?

[Anonymous]

What are people seeing in the field -- Is the number of AAP-eligible kids the same as in years past? More? Fewer?

[Anonymous]

I read somewhere else that it's 500 less this year. Any knowledgeable confirmations?

[Anonymous]

And... were there fewer in-pools this year? folks are claiming but giving no basis.

[Anonymous]

Roughly the same number of kids found eligible at our school, as compared with last year. And that is before appeals.

[Anonymous]

What school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And... were there fewer in-pools this year? folks are claiming but giving no basis.

Yes, the total number of students that were in-pool this year is less than last year. But recall that last year the number of students in-pool was very high, due to the new form of the CogAT (CogAT Form 7).

(And before anyone asks, I attended Tuesday night's AAPAC meeting where the numbers were shared by Carol Horn. And no, I did not write them down.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And... were there fewer in-pools this year? folks are claiming but giving no basis.

Yes, the total number of students that were in-pool this year is less than last year. But recall that last year the number of students in-pool was very high, due to the new form of the CogAT (CogAT Form 7).

(And before anyone asks, I attended Tuesday night's AAPAC meeting where the numbers were shared by Carol Horn. And no, I did not write them down.)

So why did FCPS not take the new Cogat Form 7 into account when accepting kids last year? Seem quite unfair to other years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And... were there fewer in-pools this year? folks are claiming but giving no basis.

Yes, the total number of students that were in-pool this year is less than last year. But recall that last year the number of students in-pool was very high, due to the new form of the CogAT (CogAT Form 7).

(And before anyone asks, I attended Tuesday night's AAPAC meeting where the numbers were shared by Carol Horn. And no, I did not write them down.)

So why did FCPS not take the new Cogat Form 7 into account when accepting kids last year? Seem quite unfair to other years.

There's an old post by me (19:03 here) from last year re: the form 7. I will go search for it for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And... were there fewer in-pools this year? folks are claiming but giving no basis.

Yes, the total number of students that were in-pool this year is less than last year. But recall that last year the number of students in-pool was very high, due to the new form of the CogAT (CogAT Form 7).

(And before anyone asks, I attended Tuesday night's AAPAC meeting where the numbers were shared by Carol Horn. And no, I did not write them down.)

So why did FCPS not take the new Cogat Form 7 into account when accepting kids last year? Seem quite unfair to other years.

There's an old post by me (19:03 here) from last year re: the form 7. I will go search for it for you.

Here you go:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/215608.page#2144734

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And... were there fewer in-pools this year? folks are claiming but giving no basis.

Yes, the total number of students that were in-pool this year is less than last year. But recall that last year the number of students in-pool was very high, due to the new form of the CogAT (CogAT Form 7).

(And before anyone asks, I attended Tuesday night's AAPAC meeting where the numbers were shared by Carol Horn. And no, I did not write them down.)

How about the number of kids accepted (in-pool or referred) this year vs last?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And... were there fewer in-pools this year? folks are claiming but giving no basis.

Yes, the total number of students that were in-pool this year is less than last year. But recall that last year the number of students in-pool was very high, due to the new form of the CogAT (CogAT Form 7).

(And before anyone asks, I attended Tuesday night's AAPAC meeting where the numbers were shared by Carol Horn. And no, I did not write them down.)

How about the number of kids accepted (in-pool or referred) this year vs last?

About 500 fewer students were found Center-eligible this year as compared to last year.

[Anonymous]

I think the number of second graders found eligible in 2011 (two years ago) was 1300. So the 500 less represent a big drop in center-eligibles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the number of second graders found eligible in 2011 (two years ago) was 1300. So the 500 less represent a big drop in center-eligibles.

Last year's number was unusually high, so perhaps the 500 less number brings the total group to a more usual number.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the number of second graders found eligible in 2011 (two years ago) was 1300. So the 500 less represent a big drop in center-eligibles.

Last year's number was unusually high, so perhaps the 500 less number brings the total group to a more usual number.

3,005 students last year

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/aapac/AAPACpresentationJan2013.pdf

[Anonymous]

Is that only 2nd graders though or all that were screened?