What percentage of AAP kids are truly genius level gifted

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me clarify the 89% math was iready math in early September. I don’t have any other math score but I assume it has gone up.

I’m not questioning if he’s gifted or just bright, I thought most aap are bright and not truly gifted….

Most kids in AAP are scoring in the 99th percentile in one iReady and probably 95th or higher percentile in the second. DS was 99th percentile for both iReadys and Passed Advanced for all of his SOLs, including 600s two out of four years in reading and math and a 600 on the science SOL. He is not a genius, but he is really smart.

The 89th percentile in Math is strong but not high enough for AAP at most schools.

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

My first was a 99th percentile kid, all the time.

My second was a low-90th percentile kid.

My third was like 88th percentile.

All 3 were admitted to AAP.

Very tired of the "if your kid is merely bright they don't belong in AAP" tropes. People - it's not that special. It's 20% of the county.

This. The top 20% of the country is not all geniuses. Not even close.

This fact is what makes it so hard for people to accept that their child didn't get in. It would be one thing if AAP only took truly gifted 1-3% of kids in FCPS. Then you're in good company. I think it's hard for parents to accept that their kid can't even make the lowered standard. It's a real knock on the ego.

That doesn't seem to be the problem, here. OP's kid was in pool with 99th percentile test scores. The teacher told the parents that OP's kid is "very bright," so the kid must be showing advanced behaviors in class. The teacher seems to think that AAP is a program only for that truly gifted 1-3% and not for the regular bright kids. I can see why OP is confused when the majority of kids in AAP are comparable to or even less bright than OP's kid. This is the problem with using a very subjective rating scale as the primary metric for AAP admissions. Not every teacher is going to be on the same page regarding the level of kids in AAP and how generously or harshly they're supposed to rate them when filling out the HOPE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids like Jeremy Schumer who was doing calculus at age 6 and went to college at 12 (Ivy League)- those are the geniuses. AAP stands for advanced. Big difference.

There's a lot of space between child prodigies and ordinary above average kids. If we define +1 SD as "bright," +2 SD as "gifted," and +3 SD or higher as "genius," then AAP includes a lot of bright kids, a decent number of gifted kids, and a small handful of geniuses.

I would not expect any bright kids to struggle with the FCPS AAP curriculum.

op asked if all kids in AAP are genius-level gifted. They are advanced and almost none are genius. That fact doesn’t move the needle though on whether her bright DC should be in AAP so while an interesting question, not relevant if about OP wanting DC in AAP.

Best advice if don’t get in first time- appeal and if rejected again, apply again next year.

OP is hurt because the Teacher said that her daughter isn't gifted which counters her own feelings about her child. She was pretty clear on that in her initial post. It sounded like the OP asked for a conference to discuss why her daughter wasn't accepted into AAP and was hurt by the combination of the HOPE scores and the Teachers comments.

As parents you have to understand that people will see your kid differently then you and that their lenses might be showing things that you need to know. Your kid is going to behave differently at school so the Teacher is going to see them differently then you. I had one friend comment that the GBRSs made her kid seem very average. He is a smart kid but not intellectually curious. He does well in school but isn't the kid asking for more. He would prefer to be in the slower moving class because it is less work but keeps up fine when placed in the advanced group. My experience has been that the parents of kids not accepted all think that the Teachers don't understand their kid and don't see their inherent amazingness. I don't think that is the case at all, I mean some Teachers might not like a particular kid, but for the most part, Teachers are asked to be evaluated on what they see in the classroom and in the class work.

It sounds like the OP was told that she had a bright child who has not demonstrated a need for AAP based on what they are seeing in the classroom. The test scores are strong but not over the top amazing. The math test score is good but not great. I would bet that the child's math grade is good but that the child doesn't pick up on the concepts immediately and isn't able to work that far ahead. There is nothing wrong with that, it is where the kid is.

The disconnect here is that the bolded paragraph describes the majority of kids accepted into AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me clarify the 89% math was iready math in early September. I don’t have any other math score but I assume it has gone up.

I’m not questioning if he’s gifted or just bright, I thought most aap are bright and not truly gifted….

Most kids in AAP are scoring in the 99th percentile in one iReady and probably 95th or higher percentile in the second. DS was 99th percentile for both iReadys and Passed Advanced for all of his SOLs, including 600s two out of four years in reading and math and a 600 on the science SOL. He is not a genius, but he is really smart.

The 89th percentile in Math is strong but not high enough for AAP at most schools.

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

My first was a 99th percentile kid, all the time.

My second was a low-90th percentile kid.

My third was like 88th percentile.

All 3 were admitted to AAP.

Very tired of the "if your kid is merely bright they don't belong in AAP" tropes. People - it's not that special. It's 20% of the county.

This. The top 20% of the country is not all geniuses. Not even close.

This fact is what makes it so hard for people to accept that their child didn't get in. It would be one thing if AAP only took truly gifted 1-3% of kids in FCPS. Then you're in good company. I think it's hard for parents to accept that their kid can't even make the lowered standard. It's a real knock on the ego.

That doesn't seem to be the problem, here. OP's kid was in pool with 99th percentile test scores. The teacher told the parents that OP's kid is "very bright," so the kid must be showing advanced behaviors in class. The teacher seems to think that AAP is a program only for that truly gifted 1-3% and not for the regular bright kids. I can see why OP is confused when the majority of kids in AAP are comparable to or even less bright than OP's kid. This is the problem with using a very subjective rating scale as the primary metric for AAP admissions. Not every teacher is going to be on the same page regarding the level of kids in AAP and how generously or harshly they're supposed to rate them when filling out the HOPE.

No teacher in FCPS believes AAP is for the top 1-3%. It would have to be their first day teaching or first day on the planet to draw that conclusion .The teacher was explaining to OP why their kid didn't make it in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is this even a thread.

It's the Advanced Academic Program, not the Gifted Genius Program.

Because at my teacher conference the AART and my DD teacher explained that she is very bright but not gifted. She even mentioned bill gates and Elon musk. Hope scores are often and almost always.

[Anonymous]

Also zero comments on the actual hope. I feel like that’s where the teacher could have written more positive things but the comment section was blank.

[Anonymous]

Thank you for the reply’s. Perhaps my school is more competitive for the AAP programs and only taking truly gifted and not hard working kids that are bored in class getting everything correct. I did hear that they take the top relative to the class. I did appeal so I hope we can get in and if not try again next year. I didn’t tell my daughter she hasn’t gotten in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me clarify the 89% math was iready math in early September. I don’t have any other math score but I assume it has gone up.

I’m not questioning if he’s gifted or just bright, I thought most aap are bright and not truly gifted….

Most kids in AAP are scoring in the 99th percentile in one iReady and probably 95th or higher percentile in the second. DS was 99th percentile for both iReadys and Passed Advanced for all of his SOLs, including 600s two out of four years in reading and math and a 600 on the science SOL. He is not a genius, but he is really smart.

The 89th percentile in Math is strong but not high enough for AAP at most schools.

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

My first was a 99th percentile kid, all the time.

My second was a low-90th percentile kid.

My third was like 88th percentile.

All 3 were admitted to AAP.

Very tired of the "if your kid is merely bright they don't belong in AAP" tropes. People - it's not that special. It's 20% of the county.

This. The top 20% of the country is not all geniuses. Not even close.

This fact is what makes it so hard for people to accept that their child didn't get in. It would be one thing if AAP only took truly gifted 1-3% of kids in FCPS. Then you're in good company. I think it's hard for parents to accept that their kid can't even make the lowered standard. It's a real knock on the ego.

That doesn't seem to be the problem, here. OP's kid was in pool with 99th percentile test scores. The teacher told the parents that OP's kid is "very bright," so the kid must be showing advanced behaviors in class. The teacher seems to think that AAP is a program only for that truly gifted 1-3% and not for the regular bright kids. I can see why OP is confused when the majority of kids in AAP are comparable to or even less bright than OP's kid. This is the problem with using a very subjective rating scale as the primary metric for AAP admissions. Not every teacher is going to be on the same page regarding the level of kids in AAP and how generously or harshly they're supposed to rate them when filling out the HOPE.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. My child did not get into AAP in second grade, even though the teacher was very complimentary of him and said he would do well in AAP. She gave him poor marks on the HOPE, with a couple completely unhelpful comments. In third grade I applied again. Again the teacher was very complimentary of him. This time the teacher gave him much more positive marks, checked more of the "exceptional talent" boxes, and very put very complimentary comments into the hope. Nothing else about my child changed in that year. In third grade he was accepted.

Also I'm also tired of people saying that AAP is for gifted students and most students have a 99% iready. Plenty of children are accepted with lower iReady scores, including mine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me clarify the 89% math was iready math in early September. I don’t have any other math score but I assume it has gone up.

I’m not questioning if he’s gifted or just bright, I thought most aap are bright and not truly gifted….

Most kids in AAP are scoring in the 99th percentile in one iReady and probably 95th or higher percentile in the second. DS was 99th percentile for both iReadys and Passed Advanced for all of his SOLs, including 600s two out of four years in reading and math and a 600 on the science SOL. He is not a genius, but he is really smart.

The 89th percentile in Math is strong but not high enough for AAP at most schools.

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

My first was a 99th percentile kid, all the time.

My second was a low-90th percentile kid.

My third was like 88th percentile.

All 3 were admitted to AAP.

Very tired of the "if your kid is merely bright they don't belong in AAP" tropes. People - it's not that special. It's 20% of the county.

This. The top 20% of the country is not all geniuses. Not even close.

This fact is what makes it so hard for people to accept that their child didn't get in. It would be one thing if AAP only took truly gifted 1-3% of kids in FCPS. Then you're in good company. I think it's hard for parents to accept that their kid can't even make the lowered standard. It's a real knock on the ego.

That doesn't seem to be the problem, here. OP's kid was in pool with 99th percentile test scores. The teacher told the parents that OP's kid is "very bright," so the kid must be showing advanced behaviors in class. The teacher seems to think that AAP is a program only for that truly gifted 1-3% and not for the regular bright kids. I can see why OP is confused when the majority of kids in AAP are comparable to or even less bright than OP's kid. This is the problem with using a very subjective rating scale as the primary metric for AAP admissions. Not every teacher is going to be on the same page regarding the level of kids in AAP and how generously or harshly they're supposed to rate them when filling out the HOPE.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. My child did not get into AAP in second grade, even though the teacher was very complimentary of him and said he would do well in AAP. She gave him poor marks on the HOPE, with a couple completely unhelpful comments. In third grade I applied again. Again the teacher was very complimentary of him. This time the teacher gave him much more positive marks, checked more of the "exceptional talent" boxes, and very put very complimentary comments into the hope. Nothing else about my child changed in that year. In third grade he was accepted.

Also I'm also tired of people saying that AAP is for gifted students and most students have a 99% iready. Plenty of children are accepted with lower iReady scores, including mine.

I would guess that the high SES schools have classes where the vast majority of students have iReadys in the 95th percentile or higher. I would expect lower CoGAT, NNAT, and iReady scores at the schools with higher FARMs rate. If you are coming out of a school where kids are encouraged academically at home then you are less likely to be accepted with iReady scores that are lower. The programs are starting to match the schools and the schools feeding them. I don't think that is a problem, LIV probably should be geared to the top 10% of each school. It has grown because there are parents who are so focused on their kids being in that top group. One of the recommendations from the AAP audit in 2020 was to remove parental referrals and appeals because it is primarily used by wealthier families.

Can you imagine the outrage if the process was changed to only accepting the in-pool kids?

So yes, there are kids with lower iReady scores, but they are not close to being in the majority. Just like there are kids with CoGAT scores in the 115's, but they are not close to being in the majority. Overall, the kids in AAP will have CoGATs in the mid 130's or higher and iReadys in the 95th percentile. And I would guess that the kids with lower CoGATs and iReadys are kids whose parents appealed and reapplied or are URM at high FARMs schools. Parents should be looking out for their kids but let's not pretend that the Committee is allowing in lots of kids with lower scores in schools feeding McLean, Langley, or Oakton HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids like Jeremy Schumer who was doing calculus at age 6 and went to college at 12 (Ivy League)- those are the geniuses. AAP stands for advanced. Big difference.

There's a lot of space between child prodigies and ordinary above average kids. If we define +1 SD as "bright," +2 SD as "gifted," and +3 SD or higher as "genius," then AAP includes a lot of bright kids, a decent number of gifted kids, and a small handful of geniuses.

I would not expect any bright kids to struggle with the FCPS AAP curriculum.

op asked if all kids in AAP are genius-level gifted. They are advanced and almost none are genius. That fact doesn’t move the needle though on whether her bright DC should be in AAP so while an interesting question, not relevant if about OP wanting DC in AAP.

Best advice if don’t get in first time- appeal and if rejected again, apply again next year.

OP is hurt because the Teacher said that her daughter isn't gifted which counters her own feelings about her child. She was pretty clear on that in her initial post. It sounded like the OP asked for a conference to discuss why her daughter wasn't accepted into AAP and was hurt by the combination of the HOPE scores and the Teachers comments.

As parents you have to understand that people will see your kid differently then you and that their lenses might be showing things that you need to know. Your kid is going to behave differently at school so the Teacher is going to see them differently then you. I had one friend comment that the GBRSs made her kid seem very average. He is a smart kid but not intellectually curious. He does well in school but isn't the kid asking for more. He would prefer to be in the slower moving class because it is less work but keeps up fine when placed in the advanced group. My experience has been that the parents of kids not accepted all think that the Teachers don't understand their kid and don't see their inherent amazingness. I don't think that is the case at all, I mean some Teachers might not like a particular kid, but for the most part, Teachers are asked to be evaluated on what they see in the classroom and in the class work.

It sounds like the OP was told that she had a bright child who has not demonstrated a need for AAP based on what they are seeing in the classroom. The test scores are strong but not over the top amazing. The math test score is good but not great. I would bet that the child's math grade is good but that the child doesn't pick up on the concepts immediately and isn't able to work that far ahead. There is nothing wrong with that, it is where the kid is.

The disconnect here is that the bolded paragraph describes the majority of kids accepted into AAP.

+1. I have 1 kid who might be gifted (definitely not genius), but honestly might just be a smart Type A girl, and 2 who are merely bright. All 3 in AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me clarify the 89% math was iready math in early September. I don’t have any other math score but I assume it has gone up.

I’m not questioning if he’s gifted or just bright, I thought most aap are bright and not truly gifted….

Most kids in AAP are scoring in the 99th percentile in one iReady and probably 95th or higher percentile in the second. DS was 99th percentile for both iReadys and Passed Advanced for all of his SOLs, including 600s two out of four years in reading and math and a 600 on the science SOL. He is not a genius, but he is really smart.

The 89th percentile in Math is strong but not high enough for AAP at most schools.

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

My first was a 99th percentile kid, all the time.

My second was a low-90th percentile kid.

My third was like 88th percentile.

All 3 were admitted to AAP.

Very tired of the "if your kid is merely bright they don't belong in AAP" tropes. People - it's not that special. It's 20% of the county.

This. The top 20% of the country is not all geniuses. Not even close.

This fact is what makes it so hard for people to accept that their child didn't get in. It would be one thing if AAP only took truly gifted 1-3% of kids in FCPS. Then you're in good company. I think it's hard for parents to accept that their kid can't even make the lowered standard. It's a real knock on the ego.

That doesn't seem to be the problem, here. OP's kid was in pool with 99th percentile test scores. The teacher told the parents that OP's kid is "very bright," so the kid must be showing advanced behaviors in class. The teacher seems to think that AAP is a program only for that truly gifted 1-3% and not for the regular bright kids. I can see why OP is confused when the majority of kids in AAP are comparable to or even less bright than OP's kid. This is the problem with using a very subjective rating scale as the primary metric for AAP admissions. Not every teacher is going to be on the same page regarding the level of kids in AAP and how generously or harshly they're supposed to rate them when filling out the HOPE.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. My child did not get into AAP in second grade, even though the teacher was very complimentary of him and said he would do well in AAP. She gave him poor marks on the HOPE, with a couple completely unhelpful comments. In third grade I applied again. Again the teacher was very complimentary of him. This time the teacher gave him much more positive marks, checked more of the "exceptional talent" boxes, and very put very complimentary comments into the hope. Nothing else about my child changed in that year. In third grade he was accepted.

Also I'm also tired of people saying that AAP is for gifted students and most students have a 99% iready. Plenty of children are accepted with lower iReady scores, including mine.

I would guess that the high SES schools have classes where the vast majority of students have iReadys in the 95th percentile or higher. I would expect lower CoGAT, NNAT, and iReady scores at the schools with higher FARMs rate. If you are coming out of a school where kids are encouraged academically at home then you are less likely to be accepted with iReady scores that are lower. The programs are starting to match the schools and the schools feeding them. I don't think that is a problem, LIV probably should be geared to the top 10% of each school. It has grown because there are parents who are so focused on their kids being in that top group. One of the recommendations from the AAP audit in 2020 was to remove parental referrals and appeals because it is primarily used by wealthier families.

Can you imagine the outrage if the process was changed to only accepting the in-pool kids?

So yes, there are kids with lower iReady scores, but they are not close to being in the majority. Just like there are kids with CoGAT scores in the 115's, but they are not close to being in the majority. Overall, the kids in AAP will have CoGATs in the mid 130's or higher and iReadys in the 95th percentile. And I would guess that the kids with lower CoGATs and iReadys are kids whose parents appealed and reapplied or are URM at high FARMs schools. Parents should be looking out for their kids but let's not pretend that the Committee is allowing in lots of kids with lower scores in schools feeding McLean, Langley, or Oakton HS.

PP who mentioned kids with lower iReadies who are in. Our center/base had a 10% FARMS rate. Not the lowest in the county but not high by any means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me clarify the 89% math was iready math in early September. I don’t have any other math score but I assume it has gone up.

I’m not questioning if he’s gifted or just bright, I thought most aap are bright and not truly gifted….

Most kids in AAP are scoring in the 99th percentile in one iReady and probably 95th or higher percentile in the second. DS was 99th percentile for both iReadys and Passed Advanced for all of his SOLs, including 600s two out of four years in reading and math and a 600 on the science SOL. He is not a genius, but he is really smart.

The 89th percentile in Math is strong but not high enough for AAP at most schools.

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

My first was a 99th percentile kid, all the time.

My second was a low-90th percentile kid.

My third was like 88th percentile.

All 3 were admitted to AAP.

Very tired of the "if your kid is merely bright they don't belong in AAP" tropes. People - it's not that special. It's 20% of the county.

This. The top 20% of the country is not all geniuses. Not even close.

This fact is what makes it so hard for people to accept that their child didn't get in. It would be one thing if AAP only took truly gifted 1-3% of kids in FCPS. Then you're in good company. I think it's hard for parents to accept that their kid can't even make the lowered standard. It's a real knock on the ego.

That doesn't seem to be the problem, here. OP's kid was in pool with 99th percentile test scores. The teacher told the parents that OP's kid is "very bright," so the kid must be showing advanced behaviors in class. The teacher seems to think that AAP is a program only for that truly gifted 1-3% and not for the regular bright kids. I can see why OP is confused when the majority of kids in AAP are comparable to or even less bright than OP's kid. This is the problem with using a very subjective rating scale as the primary metric for AAP admissions. Not every teacher is going to be on the same page regarding the level of kids in AAP and how generously or harshly they're supposed to rate them when filling out the HOPE.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. My child did not get into AAP in second grade, even though the teacher was very complimentary of him and said he would do well in AAP. She gave him poor marks on the HOPE, with a couple completely unhelpful comments. In third grade I applied again. Again the teacher was very complimentary of him. This time the teacher gave him much more positive marks, checked more of the "exceptional talent" boxes, and very put very complimentary comments into the hope. Nothing else about my child changed in that year. In third grade he was accepted.

Also I'm also tired of people saying that AAP is for gifted students and most students have a 99% iready. Plenty of children are accepted with lower iReady scores, including mine.

I would guess that the high SES schools have classes where the vast majority of students have iReadys in the 95th percentile or higher. I would expect lower CoGAT, NNAT, and iReady scores at the schools with higher FARMs rate. If you are coming out of a school where kids are encouraged academically at home then you are less likely to be accepted with iReady scores that are lower. The programs are starting to match the schools and the schools feeding them. I don't think that is a problem, LIV probably should be geared to the top 10% of each school. It has grown because there are parents who are so focused on their kids being in that top group. One of the recommendations from the AAP audit in 2020 was to remove parental referrals and appeals because it is primarily used by wealthier families.

Can you imagine the outrage if the process was changed to only accepting the in-pool kids?

So yes, there are kids with lower iReady scores, but they are not close to being in the majority. Just like there are kids with CoGAT scores in the 115's, but they are not close to being in the majority. Overall, the kids in AAP will have CoGATs in the mid 130's or higher and iReadys in the 95th percentile. And I would guess that the kids with lower CoGATs and iReadys are kids whose parents appealed and reapplied or are URM at high FARMs schools. Parents should be looking out for their kids but let's not pretend that the Committee is allowing in lots of kids with lower scores in schools feeding McLean, Langley, or Oakton HS.

Another recommendation from the AAP Audit was that the percentile for in pool was too high and should be lower then 98th percentile in order to capture more gifted children. FCPS decided to do the opposite and now most high SES schools top 10% are higher than 99th percentile, some are 99.something percentile. This is ridiculous. A lot of students in the highest SES schools have inherited their parent’s genes for intelligence, coming from parents who are doctors, lawyers, etc.

A student in the 98th or 99th percentile shouldn’t be rejected from AAP just because their school is wealthier. All advanced children should have an opportunity for the Advanced Academic Program. Having peers in the regular education class that also got rejected from AAP because of the bias against high SES students does not do anything at all to provide a student with a more advanced and in depth education. It just “potentially” provides a few other students that are equally not engaged or challenged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me clarify the 89% math was iready math in early September. I don’t have any other math score but I assume it has gone up.

I’m not questioning if he’s gifted or just bright, I thought most aap are bright and not truly gifted….

Most kids in AAP are scoring in the 99th percentile in one iReady and probably 95th or higher percentile in the second. DS was 99th percentile for both iReadys and Passed Advanced for all of his SOLs, including 600s two out of four years in reading and math and a 600 on the science SOL. He is not a genius, but he is really smart.

The 89th percentile in Math is strong but not high enough for AAP at most schools.

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

My first was a 99th percentile kid, all the time.

My second was a low-90th percentile kid.

My third was like 88th percentile.

All 3 were admitted to AAP.

Very tired of the "if your kid is merely bright they don't belong in AAP" tropes. People - it's not that special. It's 20% of the county.

This. The top 20% of the country is not all geniuses. Not even close.

This fact is what makes it so hard for people to accept that their child didn't get in. It would be one thing if AAP only took truly gifted 1-3% of kids in FCPS. Then you're in good company. I think it's hard for parents to accept that their kid can't even make the lowered standard. It's a real knock on the ego.

That doesn't seem to be the problem, here. OP's kid was in pool with 99th percentile test scores. The teacher told the parents that OP's kid is "very bright," so the kid must be showing advanced behaviors in class. The teacher seems to think that AAP is a program only for that truly gifted 1-3% and not for the regular bright kids. I can see why OP is confused when the majority of kids in AAP are comparable to or even less bright than OP's kid. This is the problem with using a very subjective rating scale as the primary metric for AAP admissions. Not every teacher is going to be on the same page regarding the level of kids in AAP and how generously or harshly they're supposed to rate them when filling out the HOPE.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. My child did not get into AAP in second grade, even though the teacher was very complimentary of him and said he would do well in AAP. She gave him poor marks on the HOPE, with a couple completely unhelpful comments. In third grade I applied again. Again the teacher was very complimentary of him. This time the teacher gave him much more positive marks, checked more of the "exceptional talent" boxes, and very put very complimentary comments into the hope. Nothing else about my child changed in that year. In third grade he was accepted.

Also I'm also tired of people saying that AAP is for gifted students and most students have a 99% iready. Plenty of children are accepted with lower iReady scores, including mine.

I would guess that the high SES schools have classes where the vast majority of students have iReadys in the 95th percentile or higher. I would expect lower CoGAT, NNAT, and iReady scores at the schools with higher FARMs rate. If you are coming out of a school where kids are encouraged academically at home then you are less likely to be accepted with iReady scores that are lower. The programs are starting to match the schools and the schools feeding them. I don't think that is a problem, LIV probably should be geared to the top 10% of each school. It has grown because there are parents who are so focused on their kids being in that top group. One of the recommendations from the AAP audit in 2020 was to remove parental referrals and appeals because it is primarily used by wealthier families.

Can you imagine the outrage if the process was changed to only accepting the in-pool kids?

So yes, there are kids with lower iReady scores, but they are not close to being in the majority. Just like there are kids with CoGAT scores in the 115's, but they are not close to being in the majority. Overall, the kids in AAP will have CoGATs in the mid 130's or higher and iReadys in the 95th percentile. And I would guess that the kids with lower CoGATs and iReadys are kids whose parents appealed and reapplied or are URM at high FARMs schools. Parents should be looking out for their kids but let's not pretend that the Committee is allowing in lots of kids with lower scores in schools feeding McLean, Langley, or Oakton HS.

Sure but my daughter was in pool and not accepted with the teachers and AART telling me that the kids that are getting into AAP are only very high level genius like Elon musk or bill gates type kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me clarify the 89% math was iready math in early September. I don’t have any other math score but I assume it has gone up.

I’m not questioning if he’s gifted or just bright, I thought most aap are bright and not truly gifted….

Most kids in AAP are scoring in the 99th percentile in one iReady and probably 95th or higher percentile in the second. DS was 99th percentile for both iReadys and Passed Advanced for all of his SOLs, including 600s two out of four years in reading and math and a 600 on the science SOL. He is not a genius, but he is really smart.

The 89th percentile in Math is strong but not high enough for AAP at most schools.

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

My first was a 99th percentile kid, all the time.

My second was a low-90th percentile kid.

My third was like 88th percentile.

All 3 were admitted to AAP.

Very tired of the "if your kid is merely bright they don't belong in AAP" tropes. People - it's not that special. It's 20% of the county.

This. The top 20% of the country is not all geniuses. Not even close.

This fact is what makes it so hard for people to accept that their child didn't get in. It would be one thing if AAP only took truly gifted 1-3% of kids in FCPS. Then you're in good company. I think it's hard for parents to accept that their kid can't even make the lowered standard. It's a real knock on the ego.

That doesn't seem to be the problem, here. OP's kid was in pool with 99th percentile test scores. The teacher told the parents that OP's kid is "very bright," so the kid must be showing advanced behaviors in class. The teacher seems to think that AAP is a program only for that truly gifted 1-3% and not for the regular bright kids. I can see why OP is confused when the majority of kids in AAP are comparable to or even less bright than OP's kid. This is the problem with using a very subjective rating scale as the primary metric for AAP admissions. Not every teacher is going to be on the same page regarding the level of kids in AAP and how generously or harshly they're supposed to rate them when filling out the HOPE.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. My child did not get into AAP in second grade, even though the teacher was very complimentary of him and said he would do well in AAP. She gave him poor marks on the HOPE, with a couple completely unhelpful comments. In third grade I applied again. Again the teacher was very complimentary of him. This time the teacher gave him much more positive marks, checked more of the "exceptional talent" boxes, and very put very complimentary comments into the hope. Nothing else about my child changed in that year. In third grade he was accepted.

Also I'm also tired of people saying that AAP is for gifted students and most students have a 99% iready. Plenty of children are accepted with lower iReady scores, including mine.

I would guess that the high SES schools have classes where the vast majority of students have iReadys in the 95th percentile or higher. I would expect lower CoGAT, NNAT, and iReady scores at the schools with higher FARMs rate. If you are coming out of a school where kids are encouraged academically at home then you are less likely to be accepted with iReady scores that are lower. The programs are starting to match the schools and the schools feeding them. I don't think that is a problem, LIV probably should be geared to the top 10% of each school. It has grown because there are parents who are so focused on their kids being in that top group. One of the recommendations from the AAP audit in 2020 was to remove parental referrals and appeals because it is primarily used by wealthier families.

Can you imagine the outrage if the process was changed to only accepting the in-pool kids?

So yes, there are kids with lower iReady scores, but they are not close to being in the majority. Just like there are kids with CoGAT scores in the 115's, but they are not close to being in the majority. Overall, the kids in AAP will have CoGATs in the mid 130's or higher and iReadys in the 95th percentile. And I would guess that the kids with lower CoGATs and iReadys are kids whose parents appealed and reapplied or are URM at high FARMs schools. Parents should be looking out for their kids but let's not pretend that the Committee is allowing in lots of kids with lower scores in schools feeding McLean, Langley, or Oakton HS.

Sure but my daughter was in pool and not accepted with the teachers and AART telling me that the kids that are getting into AAP are only very high level genius like Elon musk or bill gates type kids.

That is demonstrably not true (and we'll set aside the argument on whether she picked actual representative geniuses...)

Kids with 99 on the CogAT - not 99th percentil but a VQN of 99 - were listed as accepted in the 2020 report. That data was from like 2018 so I think they are current 9th graders?

[Anonymous]

Don’t worry, it’s not really that great anyway.

[Anonymous]

"only very high level genius like Elon musk or bill gates type kids."

As a parent of 2 kids who are profoundly gifted and very quirky, to say the least, I can confirm this is BS. They were both rejected with FSIQ > 3 SD. We are not at a super competitive high SES school. My kids do not fit the FCPS neat-and-tidy profile of a kid who "needs AAP." They don't ask for more worksheets with alacrity. My guess is they appear disengaged because, frankly, they are. One child got in but AAP is still way below their needs. We are having a hard time supporting them. But the system does not automatically select brilliant kids. From what I have observed in my n=1, FCPS selects kids who are above average reading+math and appear to like school. That's it.