Gifted kid did not get through AAP - HELP please

[Anonymous]

How can they tell the difference between hot housed and normal kids, lol?

My friend's son got in with very low scores but a decent GBRS. Why is he more "deserving" than someone like OP's kid? The whole process is nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
They rated using occasionally, frequently, or consistently. People are reporting the number of times each term was used. It roughly translates to the old numbers with Consistently being a 4, Frequently a 3 and occasionally a 2.

Disagree. Based on the acceptance threads, 2C and 2F is the new "12". Both are the threshold where a child looks like a good candidate for AAP based on GBRS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for all your comments. When teachers in every parent teacher meet say he is extremely advanced for his age, and when they write that even in the GBRS comments, especially in the highlighted skills of math science and social studies, parents will think their kid is advanced. Further when some coaches for STEM or even activities like Music, singing say he amazes them, parents make conclusions and sometimes you never realize your kids and only know when others tell you.

We are awaiting his WISC scores,the report. But the meeting after the test, the psychologist said, “his thinking and application skills is excellent, his factual reasoning is very high and sometimes those kids with high factual skills fair less on verbal creative writing”.

Anyway, whoever is just making assumptions on our kids, please stop. I am not defending any parent here, If you have a suggestion, pls do, we also struggle as a parent, and it hurts when your kid says it is boring at school, they only tell you about solid liquid gases, and I want to experiment on it, I want to ask my teacher why we can’t hold gas but can hold ice cube, but all other kids scream, and my teacher can’t answer me and just ask me to write this. We are looking for ways, when we think our child is gifted, it is not because we assume, because we are told continuously by people, coaches, teachers we meet that they are so. when we look at our kids, we look at them without any adjectives. And adjectives are added genuinely by people who mentor them and we learn a lot about our kids from them and also on our interaction.

So pls do help parents when they are in unique situations rather than judging that parent just think kids are gifted.

Are you an Asian family, by chance?

Yes, we are Asians

I am an Asian, and OP, your posts screamed like how my parents were growing up. My school system growing up didn't have a talented/gifted/advance placement program, but my parents (both scientists) taught me trigonometry/animal biology/physics all starting in grade school and by the time we were in middle school my brother and I were well versed in pre-calc and had some calculus in us. They were by all means tiger parents. But I was not happy, and neither was my brother. I really don't know what the point of my post is, but my general impression is that if you child is in fact gifted and talented, getting into AAP is not the end all be all of the rest of his life. I know plenty, PLENTY, of friends who didn't belong in gifted/talented/AAP programs nor "adjectives" were used to describe them growing up, but they somehow ended up in [Insert Ivy school]. My point being, you can always supplement at home and your parenting, especially at the primary education level, is by far more important than any classroom can teach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How can they tell the difference between hot housed and normal kids, lol?

My friend's son got in with very low scores but a decent GBRS. Why is he more "deserving" than someone like OP's kid? The whole process is nuts.

I doubt anyone is getting in with very low scores. I think the committee is assuming that a kid with 125 scores who is highly regarded by the 2nd grade teacher and seems un-prepped is a better candidate than an in-pool kid who looks like the product of tutoring and prep camp. I have no idea how they're distinguishing between the two groups, other than based on teacher comments and parent letters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was that the cogat cumulative score or highest section?

?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was that the cogat cumulative score or highest section?

?

Think this poster meant composite score or section with highest score

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can they tell the difference between hot housed and normal kids, lol?

My friend's son got in with very low scores but a decent GBRS. Why is he more "deserving" than someone like OP's kid? The whole process is nuts.

I doubt anyone is getting in with very low scores. I think the committee is assuming that a kid with 125 scores who is highly regarded by the 2nd grade teacher and seems un-prepped is a better candidate than an in-pool kid who looks like the product of tutoring and prep camp. I have no idea how they're distinguishing between the two groups, other than based on teacher comments and parent letters.

This kid had a 119 overall Cogat and a low 100s NNAT, those are pretty low scores IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can they tell the difference between hot housed and normal kids, lol?

My friend's son got in with very low scores but a decent GBRS. Why is he more "deserving" than someone like OP's kid? The whole process is nuts.

I doubt anyone is getting in with very low scores. I think the committee is assuming that a kid with 125 scores who is highly regarded by the 2nd grade teacher and seems un-prepped is a better candidate than an in-pool kid who looks like the product of tutoring and prep camp. I have no idea how they're distinguishing between the two groups, other than based on teacher comments and parent letters.

I think this is the real mystery this year. Were they told that certain factors in the file indicated a kid who had been tutored/prep-camped? You would assume that a file without parent recommendation/home work samples/submissions would be given more the benefit of the doubt (because a prep camp parent would put together a big file). But that seems like the opposite of what people are reporting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was the GBRS rating?

A lot of high scoring kids were rejected in the first round this year, no one knows why.

Get a WISC and he will almost certainly get in on appeal.

We requested the screening file and in the screening there was no score for GBRS, only the commentary section by teacher. The AART teacher said this year they are not scoring. I am wondering how everyone is getting to know the GBRS scores?

Although the GBRS this year does not have a numerical score (4-16) the selection committee still had to "score" your child in each of the GBRS categories, using consistently observed, frequently observed or occasionally observed. The GBRS with commentary will have this wording on each of the categories. People have been using the shorthand all consistently, or 2 C, 1 F, etc for their GBRS scores. Some people said it still really correlates to the numerical GBRS scale: consistently is a 4, frequently is a 3 and occasionally is a 2 so you still get a number at the end. For example all consistently would be like having a 16 on the old scale. Hope this helps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can they tell the difference between hot housed and normal kids, lol?

My friend's son got in with very low scores but a decent GBRS. Why is he more "deserving" than someone like OP's kid? The whole process is nuts.

I doubt anyone is getting in with very low scores. I think the committee is assuming that a kid with 125 scores who is highly regarded by the 2nd grade teacher and seems un-prepped is a better candidate than an in-pool kid who looks like the product of tutoring and prep camp. I have no idea how they're distinguishing between the two groups, other than based on teacher comments and parent letters.

This kid had a 119 overall Cogat and a low 100s NNAT, those are pretty low scores IMO.

Wow. That is low for AAP. Is the kid so far beyond all of the 2nd graders in his class that the scores don't really represent his true ability?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can they tell the difference between hot housed and normal kids, lol?

My friend's son got in with very low scores but a decent GBRS. Why is he more "deserving" than someone like OP's kid? The whole process is nuts.

I doubt anyone is getting in with very low scores. I think the committee is assuming that a kid with 125 scores who is highly regarded by the 2nd grade teacher and seems un-prepped is a better candidate than an in-pool kid who looks like the product of tutoring and prep camp. I have no idea how they're distinguishing between the two groups, other than based on teacher comments and parent letters.

This kid had a 119 overall Cogat and a low 100s NNAT, those are pretty low scores IMO.

Wow. That is low for AAP. Is the kid so far beyond all of the 2nd graders in his class that the scores don't really represent his true ability?

LOL. No. We are at a center so maybe that helps? I don't know.

[Anonymous]

With these test scores, the child should accepted. No matter what. I am against prepping, but the committee should not be making decisions based on whether they think a child has been prepped for a test or not. They really have no idea.

I don't care what this person thinks about her child or what work samples were submitted or what the GBRS were. Any child with those test scores should be admitted.

This whole process is way too subjective and definitely not transparent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With these test scores, the child should accepted. No matter what. I am against prepping, but the committee should not be making decisions based on whether they think a child has been prepped for a test or not. They really have no idea.

I don't care what this person thinks about her child or what work samples were submitted or what the GBRS were. Any child with those test scores should be admitted.

This whole process is way too subjective and definitely not transparent.

I agree. If they are going to completely disregard test scores, they shouldn't even have the hassle of the nnat and cogat. This kid scores were insanely high.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How can they tell the difference between hot housed and normal kids, lol?

My friend's son got in with very low scores but a decent GBRS. Why is he more "deserving" than someone like OP's kid? The whole process is nuts.

Idk. This poster here says there was discrepancy between school work samples and home work samples. That probably raised a red flag.
Other things I would personally look at include whether outside activities are Kahn academy type things or more child led activities such as Odyssey of the Mind.

[Anonymous]

If my kid didn't get in with scores that high, I would be so pissed!

OP, how many consistentlys and frequentlys did he have?