2020 AAP Acceptances

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think GBRS and school submitted samples play a very important role. Dare I say more important than Cogat it seems!

I agree, but I think it's absurd. Good work samples are more likely to show high executive function than high intelligence. Likewise, there are many things that bias GBRS. The system is set up to select upper middle class, above average kids who are somewhat advanced. This is actually a good fit for the program, since AAP itself best serves exactly those kids. It's weird, though, that a program that is supposed to serve gifted kids fails to identify a bunch of them, and then falls far short of serving their needs when they are in the program. It's also odd that the schools keep harping about the achievement gap, but then continue changing AAP admissions in a way that is likely to admit even more already privileged kids.

Problem is that CogAT is not the best measure of identifying gifted child either. None of the measures are perfect anyways. CogAT can be easily prepped and kids in 120's can be easily prepped to get 130's.

Which is why they use the NNAT, CoGAT, GBRSs, and Work Samples. They should give the committee a more complete picture of the kids under review. If you add in the parent questionnaire, parent provided work samples, and awards/letters of recommendation. The process is not perfect. There are different groups of 5 that review packets who have different ideas about what should be weighted and what is important. That is why the appeal can be useful. It is a different group of people looking at the packet and with affirming or changing the original decision.

The program is what it is. Most of the people I know who had kids go through it thought it was a solid program and their kids enjoyed it. The only negative I have heard some people mention is that it is not the greatest social experience at the Center schools. It sounds like at our Center that the kids end up segregating by their base school. But no one has said that the academic portion is too slow or problematic. There is a small group of parents who seem to think that it moves too slowly. I suspect a good number of those parents have had their kids in some type of after school tutoring for a few years. The material feels slow because their kids are ahead due to the tutoring programs. I get that impression from the posts I have seen on this site and talking to some of my friends whose kids are at different schools.

True, I know many kids from AAP go to some sort of after school enrichment. The one my son goes for math is a probably couple of months ahead his AAP in terms of concepts learned, but has more depth and repetition. The program primarily relies on home work packets with very little instruction. He generally finds this after school math challenging and I help him out frequently, but then he finds school math easy - probably because he learned the concepts already. However, if the kid is not in AAP, this program might be too far ahead of the class and might be very difficult for the kids. Personally, I think a strong foundation in math is very important and I would recommend it if the kid can take it.
[/quote

I think this varies widely. My AAP kids never did academic enrichment (they like more free-time and seem to use it well enough by my standards) and I do think they got a distorted perception that they weren't as strong as math as they were because the kids in the local enrichment programs purposefully teach a curriculum just a bit ahead of AAP so that when students who are in it they are in school they look like math "naturals" compared to students who are learning the material for the first time. I agree a strong math foundation is important, but I don't think two classes teaching the similar content is the best way to get it. The math competition programs seem a better supplement as they teach deeper problem solving in math.