Apparently we're getting CogAT this week

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bizarre. 98 pct cogat for my kid who wasn’t identified for the lottery pool for CES.

Cogat is not the only factor. Maybe they had weaker map-r or district assessment.

CogAT is not a factor at all for CES. It's only based on grades + MAP.

CogAT is used for GT identificaiton only -- and that doesn't relate to admissions to CES.

At least this year. CoGAT was used in the past and I imagine will be reinstated for the CES in the future.

The office that runs CES and the office that runs GT designation are different. You are presuming a level of coordination that doesn't exist.

Both have access to the same test scores. I don't see why they wouldn't use CoGAT in the future for placement

I think this will likely depend on whether the use of CogAT would reduce or increase racial and socioeconomic disparities in who qualities for the lottery, honestly. Does anyone know if there are statistics on this from when CogAT used to be used? (I know racial and economic disparities were obscenely high when parents had to opt in to testing, but I mean the period when there was universal screening but before they stopped using CoGAT.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bizarre. 98 pct cogat for my kid who wasn’t identified for the lottery pool for CES.

Cogat is not the only factor. Maybe they had weaker map-r or district assessment.

CogAT is not a factor at all for CES. It's only based on grades + MAP.

CogAT is used for GT identificaiton only -- and that doesn't relate to admissions to CES.

At least this year. CoGAT was used in the past and I imagine will be reinstated for the CES in the future.

The office that runs CES and the office that runs GT designation are different. You are presuming a level of coordination that doesn't exist.

Both have access to the same test scores. I don't see why they wouldn't use CoGAT in the future for placement

I think this will likely depend on whether the use of CogAT would reduce or increase racial and socioeconomic disparities in who qualities for the lottery, honestly. Does anyone know if there are statistics on this from when CogAT used to be used? (I know racial and economic disparities were obscenely high when parents had to opt in to testing, but I mean the period when there was universal screening but before they stopped using CoGAT.)

Just like for MAP they'll make the cutoffs lower for high FARMS schools....

[Anonymous]

It doesn't matter what they use for placement anymore since it is lottery based.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what they use for placement anymore since it is lottery based.

Not true. If you're talking about CES or the magnets, it's not universal access. There are still thresholds that kids need to meet. The question is, why bother to apply COGAT to every kid if you're not using it other than for a meaningless G&T designation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bizarre. 98 pct cogat for my kid who wasn’t identified for the lottery pool for CES.

Cogat is not the only factor. Maybe they had weaker map-r or district assessment.

CogAT is not a factor at all for CES. It's only based on grades + MAP.

CogAT is used for GT identificaiton only -- and that doesn't relate to admissions to CES.

At least this year. CoGAT was used in the past and I imagine will be reinstated for the CES in the future.

The office that runs CES and the office that runs GT designation are different. You are presuming a level of coordination that doesn't exist.

Both have access to the same test scores. I don't see why they wouldn't use CoGAT in the future for placement

I think this will likely depend on whether the use of CogAT would reduce or increase racial and socioeconomic disparities in who qualities for the lottery, honestly. Does anyone know if there are statistics on this from when CogAT used to be used? (I know racial and economic disparities were obscenely high when parents had to opt in to testing, but I mean the period when there was universal screening but before they stopped using CoGAT.)

Exactly this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what they use for placement anymore since it is lottery based.

Not true. If you're talking about CES or the magnets, it's not universal access. There are still thresholds that kids need to meet. The question is, why bother to apply COGAT to every kid if you're not using it other than for a meaningless G&T designation.

Seems like the threshold to qualify is not high. It's an actual lottery. Low chance of selection.

[Anonymous]

Did 2nd and 3rd grade teachers get these score reports too?

[Anonymous]

Bump for any teachers on the forum

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what they use for placement anymore since it is lottery based.

Not true. If you're talking about CES or the magnets, it's not universal access. There are still thresholds that kids need to meet. The question is, why bother to apply COGAT to every kid if you're not using it other than for a meaningless G&T designation.

Seems like the threshold to qualify is not high. It's an actual lottery. Low chance of selection.

That’s your opinion. My kid with a 98 pct COGAT missed the MAP R threshold by a point. She’s a summer birthday and one of the youngest in her class. COGAT is age normed. The MAP R threshold is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what they use for placement anymore since it is lottery based.

Not true. If you're talking about CES or the magnets, it's not universal access. There are still thresholds that kids need to meet. The question is, why bother to apply COGAT to every kid if you're not using it other than for a meaningless G&T designation.

Seems like the threshold to qualify is not high. It's an actual lottery. Low chance of selection.

That’s your opinion. My kid with a 98 pct COGAT missed the MAP R threshold by a point. She’s a summer birthday and one of the youngest in her class. COGAT is age normed. The MAP R threshold is not.

Don’t pay attention to those antisocial dcum types who try to make people who are not of a certain percentile level feel like they are less than.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what they use for placement anymore since it is lottery based.

Not true. If you're talking about CES or the magnets, it's not universal access. There are still thresholds that kids need to meet. The question is, why bother to apply COGAT to every kid if you're not using it other than for a meaningless G&T designation.

Seems like the threshold to qualify is not high. It's an actual lottery. Low chance of selection.

That’s your opinion. My kid with a 98 pct COGAT missed the MAP R threshold by a point. She’s a summer birthday and one of the youngest in her class. COGAT is age normed. The MAP R threshold is not.

Yeah the current exclusively MAP-R focused CES selection is an argument for redshirting. Older kids have time to develop their reading skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what they use for placement anymore since it is lottery based.

Not true. If you're talking about CES or the magnets, it's not universal access. There are still thresholds that kids need to meet. The question is, why bother to apply COGAT to every kid if you're not using it other than for a meaningless G&T designation.

Seems like the threshold to qualify is not high. It's an actual lottery. Low chance of selection.

That’s your opinion. My kid with a 98 pct COGAT missed the MAP R threshold by a point. She’s a summer birthday and one of the youngest in her class. COGAT is age normed. The MAP R threshold is not.

Oh interesting, you got someone to tell you the MAP-R cutoff for this year? Would you mind sharing what the cutoff was and whether you are at a high, medium, or low FARMS school?

(And sorry about your daughter. It is indeed a problematic selection process as-is, I hope they'll change it in the future.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what they use for placement anymore since it is lottery based.

Not true. If you're talking about CES or the magnets, it's not universal access. There are still thresholds that kids need to meet. The question is, why bother to apply COGAT to every kid if you're not using it other than for a meaningless G&T designation.

Seems like the threshold to qualify is not high. It's an actual lottery. Low chance of selection.

That’s your opinion. My kid with a 98 pct COGAT missed the MAP R threshold by a point. She’s a summer birthday and one of the youngest in her class. COGAT is age normed. The MAP R threshold is not.

What is the map r threshold?

[Anonymous]

I think the cut off for the lottery is not high. Maybe something like 85 percentile. Then you have to get lucky with the lotto

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the cut off for the lottery is not high. Maybe something like 85 percentile. Then you have to get lucky with the lotto

75th for those with services. And it's locally normed. Which means that in schools with high FARMs rate, the national percentile can be significantly lower than that.