Rethinking AAP
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| How is prepping cheating? Could you point out where on the FCPS AAP page it specifically says that you aren't allowed to prep for the tests? |
Anonymous
This is a good question. The Cogat is designed to be a novel series of problems and to function well as a normed test it should not be prepped for. However, there are subcultures in some areas of Fairfax County where prepping has become the norm which then distorts the test percentages. If FCPS does not want prepping, they should make a statement to that effect and parents would sign a statement that they didn't have their children prep for these tests. To be sure, some may prep anyway and lie, but most adults would not want to actively lie. If FCPS doesn't care, than they should make prepping resources available through school to even the playing field and then raise the bar for entry--much like the partnership between Kaplan and the College Board for SAT prep. As it stands, we have a cultural division where many people see this kind of admissions test prep as "good parenting" and many others see it as "bad parenting." |
Anonymous
|
Even if FCPS were to care about prepping, any policies would be unenforceable. Even in the past when they had an outright cheating scandal, wherein a test prep center got ahold of the actual test and kids memorized the answers to the actual test, nothing happened to the kids who cheated.
The only sensible option is to go with resources for everyone. |
Anonymous
As the parent of an "actually" gifted kid, this just isn't such a big deal to me. Kids who are prepped do not change the 132-ish cutoff. They don't raise the bar. This isn't New York where there are limited spots. It's all good. |
Anonymous
I agree that it doesn't effect the cutoff, it doesn't change the bar, and it doesn't change whether or not they get in if they prep. However, prepping can make it more clear as to whether or not your kid is in pool or isn't in pool. For the parents out there who hate prepping, I'm going to give the reasoning in favor of it as a whole. Statistically speaking, prepping doesn't take your kid from a 100 to a 135: it's about a 10 point difference. (see Articles A and B). Because it's a very small difference, you will be able to determine whether or not you kid is clearly in the AAP program. And despite what the websites say: it's very difficult to break from 100 to 135. So if you prep, and your kid gets a 124, you can make the choice of either going a) retaking the test and getting a WISC because they should be at 134 and had a bad day or b) hope they get in on their GBRS and really should be at 114. Regardless, it's not a huge difference in score, it's a difference in outcome and work for you as a parent. As short term prepping takes about 30 days and is free, this isn't a huge financial burden. But I think a lot of parents as, well, if my kid does get 134, does that mean he/she is gifted? Nope: it just means that they tested well, on that day, in that study. More importantly, you will not have to get anything else because you are in pool and you will not have to do anything else. It's like the SATs: think about when you took your SATs. Did you prep? Did your score change by greater than 10%? Probably not. But it is no different for your kid to prep for the Cogat vs. the SATs. So prep. Do it online for free. Don't worry about the outcome because if your kid didn't get in after prepping, they are most likely where they are "supposed to be" in FCPS. FWIW I prepped, my kids did the same statistically on all of the practice exams, and got the same score at school. But because I prepped, I felt better about the score as a whole: I had no doubt. And that's the reason why prepping is not as "evil" as people think it is. It gets parents to CTFD. (Article A) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3950413/ (Article B) https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.01005.x |
Anonymous
| I'm one if the previous posters - DC didn't prep and I dont care if others do. Seems like a lot of work to me. If you have to prep to get them in, i cant imagine how much work you have to do to keep their grades up while in the program. But then again if you're in an easy level IV or center, it may not be so bad and the kid is benefitting from being able to say they are AAP. |
Anonymous
Well, I wouldn't expect there to be consequences for 2nd graders who are just doing what adults told them. I doubt they even know it was cheating and not just studying. I do wonder how these centers/parents coach their kids--are they told not to mention their studying to their teachers? |
Anonymous
Prepping, using the workbook, this summer. So far DS has completed the few pages of instruction and two sections of a practice test. Prepping in this way cost us the workbook, DH bought it so I have no idea, and maybe an hour of time. DS understood the practice pages with little help and we have not been demanding that he complete the practice test. We have not told him, nor will we tell him, to hide that he worked on the workbook this summer. We also had a summer writing workbook for him. It is the only thing he complains about doing at school and his handwriting is pretty bad. We wanted him to practice a bit so that his hand writing isn’t horrible at the start of the school year. He reads on his own, enjoys being read to, and asks to play math games so there was no real need to try and engage him in those areas. If he wanted to play an hour of video games, he needed to complete two pages in his workbook. His choice, most days he did the pages because he wanted to play on the switch. 2 days out of the week he skipped them and didn’t play video games. |
Anonymous
Eye roll all you want to, OP. You are the one who mentioned that the gen ed kids were "very poor." Your post appeared to set out what you viewed as the negative things that were causing you to have second thoughts. You put the gen ed kids being very poor as one of your top concerns. Own who you are and stop with the hypocrisy. Own that you were poor as a kid and now look down on poor kids. |
Anonymous
| No one has to punish the kid but he/she could be barred from participating in AAP that year. Or be required to take a different test. I'm sure the parents would lose their collective s#!+ |
Anonymous
And that would be punishing the kid by depriving them of a specific program. There is already a theory that the committee is looking at kids with large score increases with a critical eye, making sure that the GBRSs line up with the score change. There is a theory that the committee pays even more attention to the kids with scores on the high end with a skeptical eye and making sure that the GBRSs and grades match those profiles. If those theories are correct, then they are looking at those things because they are well aware of prepping. The reality is no one really know how the committee makes its decisions, whether or not classroom space is taken into consideration or how the evaluators actually evaluate the packages. All I know is that there are five people sitting at a table and at least 3 people have to agree to accept or decline a kid. So people guess a lot. |
Anonymous
AAP is evil. Sorry, not commenting on this particular Center. But AAP is just evil. It goes against everything that public education should stand for. |
Anonymous
I am a big believer in public education. I don't see that AAP conflicts with that. |
Anonymous
+1 AAP provides opportunities for kids who are capable of a faster paced curriculum. We can argue over who belongs in it and what over lap there is with the Gen Ed population but there are kids who clearly need a faster paced curriculum, just like there are kids who need additional support as is provided to kids with SN. But the divide between AAP kids and Gen Ed kids sounds a lot like the divide people at my kids base school complain about with the language immersion program. The kids in LI do not have specials or the like with the GE kids. It feels like two different programs in the school and the older grades in LI seem to develop an attitude that they are "better" then the kids in Gen Ed because they are learning a language and the same stuff as the Gen Ed kids. Parents try and stop that, there is no test to get into LI, your parents enter a lottery. Kids who move in after first grade are not able to join LI because of the language component. When groups are divided, for whatever reason, there are going to be people who make a big deal out of it and try to make the other side feel lesser. It is BS and it is up to the adults to correct the attitude. That doesn't mean that the programs do not have their own benefits and should be removed. It means that the parents and teachers need to make sure that their kids understand that different does not equal better. |
Anonymous
+1 +1 "Fair isn't everyone getting the same thing. Fair is everyone getting what they need in order to be successful" |