HOPE SCORES

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Thank you very much for this! My kid has 158 NNAT 152 cogat 99% 97% iready but got rejected. I just got the HOpe score 3 offen and 8 sometimes. I am so mad. I guess there is nothing I can do other than prepare more work sample to appeal

Why did they reject this kid? I wish you luck on the appeal.


Is your child hyperactive at school? You may get in by appeal. AAP teacher may have prior bias against your child if a "trouble maker". I am not blaming your child, but our society does not allow children to be children anymore. I am not blaming the teachers either, it is easy to identify regular good students but it is not that easy to identify the true gifted ones. That why there are objective measures. It is sad that the objective measures weight less than subjective measures. But this also signals that the schools/teachers are not able to support this type of learner. Looks for some other ways to help your child even if your appeal in.

[Anonymous]

got Always on #1, almost always on #6,7,11. in my opinion those are the most important HOPE scores, especially #1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Thank you very much for this! My kid has 158 NNAT 152 cogat 99% 97% iready but got rejected. I just got the HOpe score 3 offen and 8 sometimes. I am so mad. I guess there is nothing I can do other than prepare more work sample to appeal

Why did they reject this kid? I wish you luck on the appeal.

Is your child hyperactive at school? You may get in by appeal. AAP teacher may have prior bias against your child if a "trouble maker". I am not blaming your child, but our society does not allow children to be children anymore. I am not blaming the teachers either, it is easy to identify regular good students but it is not that easy to identify the true gifted ones. That why there are objective measures. It is sad that the objective measures weight less than subjective measures. But this also signals that the schools/teachers are not able to support this type of learner. Looks for some other ways to help your child even if your appeal in.


He is definitely not a trouble maker. He is a quiet introvert boy. Got a lot of fours on report cards. Quit surprised on the hope score and rejection. Maybe because he is a Asian boy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Thank you very much for this! My kid has 158 NNAT 152 cogat 99% 97% iready but got rejected. I just got the HOpe score 3 offen and 8 sometimes. I am so mad. I guess there is nothing I can do other than prepare more work sample to appeal

Why did they reject this kid? I wish you luck on the appeal.

Is your child hyperactive at school? You may get in by appeal. AAP teacher may have prior bias against your child if a "trouble maker". I am not blaming your child, but our society does not allow children to be children anymore. I am not blaming the teachers either, it is easy to identify regular good students but it is not that easy to identify the true gifted ones. That why there are objective measures. It is sad that the objective measures weight less than subjective measures. But this also signals that the schools/teachers are not able to support this type of learner. Looks for some other ways to help your child even if your appeal in.

He is definitely not a trouble maker. He is a quiet introvert boy. Got a lot of fours on report cards. Quit surprised on the hope score and rejection. Maybe because he is a Asian boy?

Contact the AART for details. Don't just satisfy with " we used holistic....." ask about how. If they compare with similar background, experience, etc, ask for details.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Thank you very much for this! My kid has 158 NNAT 152 cogat 99% 97% iready but got rejected. I just got the HOpe score 3 offen and 8 sometimes. I am so mad. I guess there is nothing I can do other than prepare more work sample to appeal

Why did they reject this kid? I wish you luck on the appeal.

Is your child hyperactive at school? You may get in by appeal. AAP teacher may have prior bias against your child if a "trouble maker". I am not blaming your child, but our society does not allow children to be children anymore. I am not blaming the teachers either, it is easy to identify regular good students but it is not that easy to identify the true gifted ones. That why there are objective measures. It is sad that the objective measures weight less than subjective measures. But this also signals that the schools/teachers are not able to support this type of learner. Looks for some other ways to help your child even if your appeal in.

He is definitely not a trouble maker. He is a quiet introvert boy. Got a lot of fours on report cards. Quit surprised on the hope score and rejection. Maybe because he is a Asian boy?

Contact the AART for details. Don't just satisfy with " we used holistic....." ask about how. If they compare with similar background, experience, etc, ask for details.

"Holistic" is another way to express non-transparent. I would expect the process is not supposed to be racist, but if they are comparing kids of similar backgrounds/experience, they may ONLY be comparing him to other Asian boys.

[Anonymous]

With HOPE requiring comparative ratings within cultural group, it's tough for Asian American students to make in with just good scores like 90 or 92, need exceptional scores like 98 or 99 on iready. Ofcourse, this is after acing nnat/cogat.

[Anonymous]

They actually call the new scores for AAP Hope scores? How pathetic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With HOPE requiring comparative ratings within cultural group, it's tough for Asian American students to make in with just good scores like 90 or 92, need exceptional scores like 98 or 99 on iready. Ofcourse, this is after acing nnat/cogat.

And this is actually why I wondered on this or another thread if there were trolls posting fake rejections. Because it brings out the people convinced that this is how the committee worked, even though people who claimed to have been on the committee have repeatedly said that's not how it worked.

[Anonymous]

My child was rejected with a good HOPE score including always on question #1. Cogat& Iready were upper 80th/low 90th percentile though. It seems most kids needed 2 of the 3 to be good to get in from what I've seen on this board.

[Anonymous]

There is so much speculation and guess work around this process. Is it possible for FCPS to have an AAP workshop to explain how decisions are made? It sounds like subjective decisions are more than objective decisions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is so much speculation and guess work around this process. Is it possible for FCPS to have an AAP workshop to explain how decisions are made? It sounds like subjective decisions are more than objective decisions

Really what it should be is X score OR teacher recommendation. That would really save a lot of time assembling a packet for 2000+ kids, having a committee meet and review 2000+ kids etc., and go a long way to make things more transparent for families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With HOPE requiring comparative ratings within cultural group, it's tough for Asian American students to make in with just good scores like 90 or 92, need exceptional scores like 98 or 99 on iready. Ofcourse, this is after acing nnat/cogat.

And this is actually why I wondered on this or another thread if there were trolls posting fake rejections. Because it brings out the people convinced that this is how the committee worked, even though people who claimed to have been on the committee have repeatedly said that's not how it worked.

Yet those self-proclaimed committee members will never explain why PP's son was rejected despite his fantastic profile. It doesn't take a genius to figure out why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is so much speculation and guess work around this process. Is it possible for FCPS to have an AAP workshop to explain how decisions are made? It sounds like subjective decisions are more than objective decisions

Really what it should be is X score OR teacher recommendation. That would really save a lot of time assembling a packet for 2000+ kids, having a committee meet and review 2000+ kids etc., and go a long way to make things more transparent for families.

Equity is important, and the HOPE approach tackles the equity gap head-on. Previously, we let scores and recommendations dictate, leading to a widening equity gap. HOPE allows comparative rating within cultural groups, which should get us to desired equity and diversity. HOPE offers a new sense of hope for a better equitable tomorrow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is so much speculation and guess work around this process. Is it possible for FCPS to have an AAP workshop to explain how decisions are made? It sounds like subjective decisions are more than objective decisions

Really what it should be is X score OR teacher recommendation. That would really save a lot of time assembling a packet for 2000+ kids, having a committee meet and review 2000+ kids etc., and go a long way to make things more transparent for families.

Equity is important, and the HOPE approach tackles the equity gap head-on. Previously, we let scores and recommendations dictate, leading to a widening equity gap. HOPE allows comparative rating within cultural groups, which should get us to desired equity and diversity. HOPE offers a new sense of hope for a better equitable tomorrow.

Please. They're basically the same thing. I can't imagine a scenario in which a teacher writes a good HOPE and doesn't recommend for AAP at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With HOPE requiring comparative ratings within cultural group, it's tough for Asian American students to make in with just good scores like 90 or 92, need exceptional scores like 98 or 99 on iready. Ofcourse, this is after acing nnat/cogat.

And this is actually why I wondered on this or another thread if there were trolls posting fake rejections. Because it brings out the people convinced that this is how the committee worked, even though people who claimed to have been on the committee have repeatedly said that's not how it worked.

Who, when and where have they said?