Kid Not Eligible for AAP though scores seem great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I like the holistic approach. I don’t think a high score should automatically get you in. There are always ways to beat the test. I think looking at work samples and teacher comments is important too.

I think the holistic approach is the reason so many slightly above average kids are in AAP, slowing down the curriculum for everyone else. UMC kids with involved parents who are providing enrichment are going to have relatively strong classroom performance and better work products, which in turn gets them into programs like AAP.

DP. I like the inclusion of so many above average kids in AAP. Maybe it slows down the curriculum, slighting my "actually gifted" kid academically, but it gives him a larger cohort, which has more value.

As long as they are not excluding kids that actually have the scores to get in.

It’s got to be more than just test scores. The kids have to show some kind of creative thinking, or work product, or have a teacher review!

Agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I like the holistic approach. I don’t think a high score should automatically get you in. There are always ways to beat the test. I think looking at work samples and teacher comments is important too.

I think the holistic approach is the reason so many slightly above average kids are in AAP, slowing down the curriculum for everyone else. UMC kids with involved parents who are providing enrichment are going to have relatively strong classroom performance and better work products, which in turn gets them into programs like AAP.

Well, my 2E kid -- HF ASD -- has never scored well in any IQ type test (CogAT, WISC) because she gets fatigues during the WISC and distracted in the CogAT. She was in AAP due to GBRS (120s on the CogAT). She is currently a junior in HS, taking 5 AP's; and getting mostly A's. And she has gotten 5's in every AP test she has taken to date.

How can you even claim 2e (gifted?) if she doesn’t score well on an IQ test?

Because the issue with her performance was the sections when she got fatigued. He said the score is not a reliable indication, in this case. And justified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I like the holistic approach. I don’t think a high score should automatically get you in. There are always ways to beat the test. I think looking at work samples and teacher comments is important too.

I think the holistic approach is the reason so many slightly above average kids are in AAP, slowing down the curriculum for everyone else. UMC kids with involved parents who are providing enrichment are going to have relatively strong classroom performance and better work products, which in turn gets them into programs like AAP.

DP. I like the inclusion of so many above average kids in AAP. Maybe it slows down the curriculum, slighting my "actually gifted" kid academically, but it gives him a larger cohort, which has more value.

As long as they are not excluding kids that actually have the scores to get in.

It’s got to be more than just test scores. The kids have to show some kind of creative thinking, or work product, or have a teacher review!

It should be test scores and grades, plus a category where teachers can recommend kids who don't have the scores and grades. AAP really doesn't require any more creative thinking than Gen Ed. People are hung up on creative thinking and exhibiting the traits the GBRS asks about when the program really is just an honors program. Until FCPS starts actually administering it as a gifted program, the real question is whether a kid can do accelerated work, not if he exhibits gifted behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I like the holistic approach. I don’t think a high score should automatically get you in. There are always ways to beat the test. I think looking at work samples and teacher comments is important too.

I think the holistic approach is the reason so many slightly above average kids are in AAP, slowing down the curriculum for everyone else. UMC kids with involved parents who are providing enrichment are going to have relatively strong classroom performance and better work products, which in turn gets them into programs like AAP.

DP. I like the inclusion of so many above average kids in AAP. Maybe it slows down the curriculum, slighting my "actually gifted" kid academically, but it gives him a larger cohort, which has more value.

As long as they are not excluding kids that actually have the scores to get in.

It’s got to be more than just test scores. The kids have to show some kind of creative thinking, or work product, or have a teacher review!

It should be test scores and grades, plus a category where teachers can recommend kids who don't have the scores and grades. AAP really doesn't require any more creative thinking than Gen Ed. People are hung up on creative thinking and exhibiting the traits the GBRS asks about when the program really is just an honors program. Until FCPS starts actually administering it as a gifted program, the real question is whether a kid can do accelerated work, not if he exhibits gifted behavior.

Except you’re forgetting one thing -the AAP curriculum isn’t just accelerated work. It does indeed require more creative thinking. What the central office puts out for AAP teachers to use are indeed higher level thinking activities and units.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I like the holistic approach. I don’t think a high score should automatically get you in. There are always ways to beat the test. I think looking at work samples and teacher comments is important too.

I think the holistic approach is the reason so many slightly above average kids are in AAP, slowing down the curriculum for everyone else. UMC kids with involved parents who are providing enrichment are going to have relatively strong classroom performance and better work products, which in turn gets them into programs like AAP.

DP. I like the inclusion of so many above average kids in AAP. Maybe it slows down the curriculum, slighting my "actually gifted" kid academically, but it gives him a larger cohort, which has more value.

As long as they are not excluding kids that actually have the scores to get in.

It’s got to be more than just test scores. The kids have to show some kind of creative thinking, or work product, or have a teacher review!

It should be test scores and grades, plus a category where teachers can recommend kids who don't have the scores and grades. AAP really doesn't require any more creative thinking than Gen Ed. People are hung up on creative thinking and exhibiting the traits the GBRS asks about when the program really is just an honors program. Until FCPS starts actually administering it as a gifted program, the real question is whether a kid can do accelerated work, not if he exhibits gifted behavior.

Except you’re forgetting one thing -the AAP curriculum isn’t just accelerated work. It does indeed require more creative thinking. What the central office puts out for AAP teachers to use are indeed higher level thinking activities and units.

Nothing that requires any more creativity or higher level thinking than an honors class. Many want to feel the program is somehow more special than an honors program, but it really isn't. Honors classes in middle and high school also have honors extensions. Are you an AAP teacher? If so, do you really think the curriculum is beyond your above average/not gifted student?

[Anonymous]

At the middle school level there is no aap curriculum. Honors and aap are the exact same standards/requirements. It’s up to the teacher to choose to differentiate beyond honors. Some do, many don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It should be test scores and grades, plus a category where teachers can recommend kids who don't have the scores and grades. AAP really doesn't require any more creative thinking than Gen Ed. People are hung up on creative thinking and exhibiting the traits the GBRS asks about when the program really is just an honors program. Until FCPS starts actually administering it as a gifted program, the real question is whether a kid can do accelerated work, not if he exhibits gifted behavior.

Except you’re forgetting one thing -the AAP curriculum isn’t just accelerated work. It does indeed require more creative thinking. What the central office puts out for AAP teachers to use are indeed higher level thinking activities and units.

Higher level thinking and creativity are not the same thing. Kids can show higher level thinking by having superior analytical or logical ability. They might be able to parse through many layers of nuance, anticipate likely outcomes, and propose interesting solutions to problems. None of this requires the type of creativity that the committee seems to desire, which largely seems to default to artistic and literary creativity and not truly outside-the-box thinking.

My kid is great with higher level thinking, but not particularly creative. It hasn't hurt him one bit in AAP, except that his creative writing stories aren't particularly good. Even if he were in gen ed, creative writing would not be a strong point.

[Anonymous]

The people reading through the files do seem biased against math ability and towards creative/artsy/literary stuff. Maybe it’s just a reflection of the kinds of people who go into education and subconscious biases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It should be test scores and grades, plus a category where teachers can recommend kids who don't have the scores and grades. AAP really doesn't require any more creative thinking than Gen Ed. People are hung up on creative thinking and exhibiting the traits the GBRS asks about when the program really is just an honors program. Until FCPS starts actually administering it as a gifted program, the real question is whether a kid can do accelerated work, not if he exhibits gifted behavior.

Except you’re forgetting one thing -the AAP curriculum isn’t just accelerated work. It does indeed require more creative thinking. What the central office puts out for AAP teachers to use are indeed higher level thinking activities and units.

Higher level thinking and creativity are not the same thing. Kids can show higher level thinking by having superior analytical or logical ability. They might be able to parse through many layers of nuance, anticipate likely outcomes, and propose interesting solutions to problems. None of this requires the type of creativity that the committee seems to desire, which largely seems to default to artistic and literary creativity and not truly outside-the-box thinking.

My kid is great with higher level thinking, but not particularly creative. It hasn't hurt him one bit in AAP, except that his creative writing stories aren't particularly good. Even if he were in gen ed, creative writing would not be a strong point.

That’s not what I meant with higher level thinking at all. I was not referring to analytical or logical ability.

[Anonymous]

What do you view as the higher level creative thinking needed for AAP? Kids seem to need superior reasoning ability, but I have yet to see anything requiring any real degree of creativity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people reading through the files do seem biased against math ability and towards creative/artsy/literary stuff. Maybe it’s just a reflection of the kinds of people who go into education and subconscious biases.

Yep. Even TJ is infected with the same insanity, where writing ability seems to matter more than math and science ability for getting admitted to the math and science magnet. I doubt anyone reviewing AAP or TJ application files even has a STEM degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do you view as the higher level creative thinking needed for AAP? Kids seem to need superior reasoning ability, but I have yet to see anything requiring any real degree of creativity.

It’s too hard to explain it on a message board, and quite frankly there’s no point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you view as the higher level creative thinking needed for AAP? Kids seem to need superior reasoning ability, but I have yet to see anything requiring any real degree of creativity.

It’s too hard to explain it on a message board, and quite frankly there’s no point.

You can't explain it on a message board, yet 20% of FCPS kids have it, 2nd grade teachers know how to identify it in 7 year olds, and selection committee members can detect it through a quick glance at work samples? GMAB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you view as the higher level creative thinking needed for AAP? Kids seem to need superior reasoning ability, but I have yet to see anything requiring any real degree of creativity.

It’s too hard to explain it on a message board, and quite frankly there’s no point.

You can't explain it on a message board, yet 20% of FCPS kids have it, 2nd grade teachers know how to identify it in 7 year olds, and selection committee members can detect it through a quick glance at work samples? GMAB.

I never claimed second grade teachers or the commitee know how to detect it. All I said was that the units suggested for use by the central office require higher level thinking and creativity. I speak from experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I never claimed second grade teachers or the commitee know how to detect it. All I said was that the units suggested for use by the central office require higher level thinking and creativity. I speak from experience.

It kind of doesn't matter, though, when regular smart kids without some special degree of creativity are excelling in AAP as it stands. Maybe the AAP teachers aren't using those units, or maybe those units don't require a degree of creative thinking above and beyond what most kids possess. To bring this back to the OP, kids with very high scores are likely to be highly successful AAP students, regardless of whether they have some special degree of creativity. They're also unlikely to be successful gen ed students, because they won't have access to the advanced coursework that their intellect and achievement indicate.