Eliminating AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: FCPS used to administer WISC but stopped because it is too expensive. It wouldn't be fair to out that cost on families.

It didn't have individual wisc tests for decades. It had cogat and otis lennen. Went to naglieri /cogat in the early 2000's to increase minority id. Then the program exploded and not with targeted minorities.

Probably correlates with the exploding growth in student membership -- see the table on page 4 and the bar graph on page 5:

http://www.fcps.edu/it/studentreporting/historical/pdfs/Ethnicity_Race_Gender/2014-15%20EthnicRaceGenderReport.pdf

No. The final year of cogat/otis lennen resulted in X number of grade 2 going to centers for grade 3. Those 3rd graders [center and base] year were all administered cogat/naglieri and many more came to centers for grade 4. That was the dramatic explosion based on change in criteria. A simple example is: If 100 kids were in grade 2 about 15 went to centers for grade 3. Assume that left 85 in the base school for grade 3 plus 3 move ins. Out of those 88 maybe 15 plus more came to the center for grade 4.

The numbers have increased pretty linearly. See page 73 of last year's AAPAC report.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/aapac/1415/AnnualReport1415.pdf

[Anonymous]

cont my PP here are the links:
http://www.fcps.edu/it/studentreporting/membership/membership_2001_2002/september/web/monthly_membership_by_cluster_county_summary_1.pdf

~Sep-01 ~Sep-03
K-6total ~ 85094 ~84620
GT ~ 2885 ~3912

[Anonymous]

No. The final year of cogat/otis lennen resulted in X number of grade 2 going to centers for grade 3. Those 3rd graders [center and base] year were all administered cogat/naglieri and many more came to centers for grade 4. That was the dramatic explosion based on change in criteria. A simple example is: If 100 kids were in grade 2 about 15 went to centers for grade 3. Assume that left 85 in the base school for grade 3 plus 3 move ins. Out of those 88 maybe 15 plus more came to the center for grade 4.

The numbers have increased pretty linearly. See page 73 of last year's AAPAC report.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/aapac/1415/AnnualReport1415.pdf


There was not a linear increase from 2000 through 2003 screening. Naglieri was implemented in 2001-2002 I believe. 1392 to 2160 eligible students? Increase of 768 was 1.55 times the prior year found eligible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People need to chill out about AAP. Even if AAP did vanish from Fairfax county, their will always be GT services for those who qualify. Just like every county in America with $. The problem here is there is no cut off entrance score. We came from out of state, GT admission was Iq composite 132. No matter how gifted a mother or teacher thinks their child is the cut off is 132, no exceptions. GT services are part of the special ed dept and schools receive extra funding per student b/c of that. The openended cut off here brings about hurt feeling and aggression from parents of many students not accepted into the AAP. Not having AAP or GT services in the Special ed dept brings about eliteism in parents of AAP students. The combination of these two makes FFC an unpleasnt environment and a bet if a mess!

We cam from out of state too. In the four states our kids have attended (in the gifted programs too) only fcps tests every single student, and only fcps tests every student twice. No other state that we have lived in does this.

All the other states only test a limited number of students RECOMMENDED BY TEACHERS. This includes the state that starts the gifted program in kindergarten. Two of the states also allowed parent requested screening, but it was a one time shot. You could also provide outside testing if you wanted to pay for it. Teachers could recommend a kid for testing in later grades if they showed a need. All the other states had hard number cutoffs.

In one state there were about 20 kids out of five kindergarten classes tested (at least one - mine - parent recommended). Two kids in the grade, mine and one other, qualified for services. In the other state (3rd grade) fewer than ten kids were recommended for testing. At least two qualified that I am aware of (my kid and a buddy).

If fcps either limited the testing to those kids recomended by teachers, or only retested the kids for Cogat who scored above a certain threshold on the nnat (may two standard deviations from the norm, or even one deviation) they could still identify all the kids who need tue services while saving sooo much money on testing and retesting the majority of kids who are right around the center of the bell curve.

Then, if they stuck to one hard number, say 132, no exceptions, they would likely fix the problems they have created.

They need to streamline and simplify the identification process.

[Anonymous]

I was in GT in FCPS in the 80s. The cut off was 140. I remember getting pulled out of class to do a very long one on one test with a psychologist. I think it was the Stanford Binet.

I have a child in AAP now. I am a huge supporter of the program as I think it was important for me and is right for my child, but I also understand the complaints of those who think it is too big.

I don't know what the answer is...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was in GT in FCPS in the 80s. The cut off was 140. I remember getting pulled out of class to do a very long one on one test with a psychologist. I think it was the Stanford Binet.

I have a child in AAP now. I am a huge supporter of the program as I think it was important for me and is right for my child, but I also understand the complaints of those who think it is too big.

I don't know what the answer is...

The program you were in doesn't exist anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in GT in FCPS in the 80s. The cut off was 140. I remember getting pulled out of class to do a very long one on one test with a psychologist. I think it was the Stanford Binet.

I have a child in AAP now. I am a huge supporter of the program as I think it was important for me and is right for my child, but I also understand the complaints of those who think it is too big.

I don't know what the answer is...

The program you were in doesn't exist anymore.

She made the distinction by calling one GT and the otyer AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No. The final year of cogat/otis lennen resulted in X number of grade 2 going to centers for grade 3. Those 3rd graders [center and base] year were all administered cogat/naglieri and many more came to centers for grade 4. That was the dramatic explosion based on change in criteria. A simple example is: If 100 kids were in grade 2 about 15 went to centers for grade 3. Assume that left 85 in the base school for grade 3 plus 3 move ins. Out of those 88 maybe 15 plus more came to the center for grade 4.

The numbers have increased pretty linearly. See page 73 of last year's AAPAC report.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/aapac/1415/AnnualReport1415.pdf


There was not a linear increase from 2000 through 2003 screening. Naglieri was implemented in 2001-2002 I believe. 1392 to 2160 eligible students? Increase of 768 was 1.55 times the prior year found eligible.

Found this description of the history:

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/column/columnlevelIV.shtml

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No. The final year of cogat/otis lennen resulted in X number of grade 2 going to centers for grade 3. Those 3rd graders [center and base] year were all administered cogat/naglieri and many more came to centers for grade 4. That was the dramatic explosion based on change in criteria. A simple example is: If 100 kids were in grade 2 about 15 went to centers for grade 3. Assume that left 85 in the base school for grade 3 plus 3 move ins. Out of those 88 maybe 15 plus more came to the center for grade 4.

The numbers have increased pretty linearly. See page 73 of last year's AAPAC report.

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/pdfs/aapac/1415/AnnualReport1415.pdf


There was not a linear increase from 2000 through 2003 screening. Naglieri was implemented in 2001-2002 I believe. 1392 to 2160 eligible students? Increase of 768 was 1.55 times the prior year found eligible.

Found this description of the history:

http://www.fcps.edu/is/aap/column/columnlevelIV.shtml


Yes-buried in a seldom clicked upon section of the FCPS website. A lengthy explanation of the 2001 dump of Otis lennen for Naglieri and the intention. Hence the non-linear explosion.

[Anonymous]

^^explosion? Looks more like a blip over the long term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People need to chill out about AAP. Even if AAP did vanish from Fairfax county, their will always be GT services for those who qualify. Just like every county in America with $. The problem here is there is no cut off entrance score. We came from out of state, GT admission was Iq composite 132. No matter how gifted a mother or teacher thinks their child is the cut off is 132, no exceptions. GT services are part of the special ed dept and schools receive extra funding per student b/c of that. The openended cut off here brings about hurt feeling and aggression from parents of many students not accepted into the AAP. Not having AAP or GT services in the Special ed dept brings about eliteism in parents of AAP students. The combination of these two makes FFC an unpleasnt environment and a bet if a mess!

We cam from out of state too. In the four states our kids have attended (in the gifted programs too) only fcps tests every single student, and only fcps tests every student twice. No other state that we have lived in does this.

All the other states only test a limited number of students RECOMMENDED BY TEACHERS. This includes the state that starts the gifted program in kindergarten. Two of the states also allowed parent requested screening, but it was a one time shot. You could also provide outside testing if you wanted to pay for it. Teachers could recommend a kid for testing in later grades if they showed a need. All the other states had hard number cutoffs.

In one state there were about 20 kids out of five kindergarten classes tested (at least one - mine - parent recommended). Two kids in the grade, mine and one other, qualified for services. In the other state (3rd grade) fewer than ten kids were recommended for testing. At least two qualified that I am aware of (my kid and a buddy).

If fcps either limited the testing to those kids recomended by teachers, or only retested the kids for Cogat who scored above a certain threshold on the nnat (may two standard deviations from the norm, or even one deviation) they could still identify all the kids who need tue services while saving sooo much money on testing and retesting the majority of kids who are right around the center of the bell curve.

Then, if they stuck to one hard number, say 132, no exceptions, they would likely fix the problems they have created.

They need to streamline and simplify the identification process.

Oh no! If they limited to whoever was recommended by the teachers, my child wouldn't have been tested! First grade teacher told me after the NNAT score came back that she was totally surprised by his 149 score and she didn't see it in his class participation/behavior. Teachers have an unconscious bias toward the well-behaved, vocal and older students in their class. There are a number of kids in DC's AAP class who wouldn't be noticed as highly superior b/c of their lack of maturity or youthfulness (i.e. summer bday kids). I think you must have been dealing with a different set of parents in those other states. That has a big impact on our program here in FCPS. So many highly educated parents -- therefore they expect "the best education" for their (presumably) highly talented children. The pressure on the teachers would be significant. If you allowed for parent requested testing, you'd probably be testing most of the kids anyway. Why pull just a few out when it doesn't really change the process of giving the test to 3/4 of the class?

I like your idea of giving only one test... just not sure how that would be implemented or really much of a savings. Seems like the easiest way to change the program is to either increase the admissions cut score, or push more of the AAP curriculum into all schools and call it a day. Maybe they should have opt-in "honors" classes in all the ES or at least for 5th and 6th grades? Or in some areas, cluster kids together (if there are not enough opting in for honors in one school).