FCPS School Board AAP discussion work session

[Anonymous]

Just watching the work session and the consultant presenting recommends FCPS drop the Naglieri as part of the screening process for AAP, asserting it is redundant. I don't think that will go over very well. I don't think it is redundant.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous]Just watching the work session and the consultant presenting recommends FCPS drop the Naglieri as part of the screening process for AAP, asserting it is redundant. I don't think that will go over very well. I don't think it is redundant. [/quote]

The report already mentioned that and it has been discussed in another thread. Most people agree it is redundant, but it needs a second replacement for equity reasons.

[Anonymous]

Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Wow, these consultants are idiots.

[Anonymous]

The NNAT and the CogAT are far too easy to prep for. The report found that the NNAT was not something considered by the committee when selecting AAP students. The GBRS and CogAT, specifically the Quant score, seemed to be the most important factors. The NNAT costs a ton of money to hold, isn't used in the fashion that FCPS wants it used, and is easy for parents to prep their kids for so the scores are not really representative of anything for a decent percentage of the kids. So why should they keep it?

I would hope that the school board was spending time on the recommendations that struck me as most useful, ending parent referral and ending appeals since those are used disproportionately by UMC families. The other recommendation was if referrals were dropped that the in-pool test score be lowered from the normal 132 or that any child in the top 10% of their individual schools scores should be considered in-pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The NNAT and the CogAT are far too easy to prep for. The report found that the NNAT was not something considered by the committee when selecting AAP students. The GBRS and CogAT, specifically the Quant score, seemed to be the most important factors. The NNAT costs a ton of money to hold, isn't used in the fashion that FCPS wants it used, and is easy for parents to prep their kids for so the scores are not really representative of anything for a decent percentage of the kids. So why should they keep it?

I would hope that the school board was spending time on the recommendations that struck me as most useful, ending parent referral and ending appeals since those are used disproportionately by UMC families. The other recommendation was if referrals were dropped that the in-pool test score be lowered from the normal 132 or that any child in the top 10% of their individual schools scores should be considered in-pool.

How the heck do you prep for the NNAT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NNAT and the CogAT are far too easy to prep for. The report found that the NNAT was not something considered by the committee when selecting AAP students. The GBRS and CogAT, specifically the Quant score, seemed to be the most important factors. The NNAT costs a ton of money to hold, isn't used in the fashion that FCPS wants it used, and is easy for parents to prep their kids for so the scores are not really representative of anything for a decent percentage of the kids. So why should they keep it?

I would hope that the school board was spending time on the recommendations that struck me as most useful, ending parent referral and ending appeals since those are used disproportionately by UMC families. The other recommendation was if referrals were dropped that the in-pool test score be lowered from the normal 132 or that any child in the top 10% of their individual schools scores should be considered in-pool.

How the heck do you prep for the NNAT?

Buy a workbook at Lotte Plaza, just like for Cogat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NNAT and the CogAT are far too easy to prep for. The report found that the NNAT was not something considered by the committee when selecting AAP students. The GBRS and CogAT, specifically the Quant score, seemed to be the most important factors. The NNAT costs a ton of money to hold, isn't used in the fashion that FCPS wants it used, and is easy for parents to prep their kids for so the scores are not really representative of anything for a decent percentage of the kids. So why should they keep it?

I would hope that the school board was spending time on the recommendations that struck me as most useful, ending parent referral and ending appeals since those are used disproportionately by UMC families. The other recommendation was if referrals were dropped that the in-pool test score be lowered from the normal 132 or that any child in the top 10% of their individual schools scores should be considered in-pool.

How the heck do you prep for the NNAT?

It's not nearly as preppable as the Cogat. Some kids get it, others don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NNAT and the CogAT are far too easy to prep for. The report found that the NNAT was not something considered by the committee when selecting AAP students. The GBRS and CogAT, specifically the Quant score, seemed to be the most important factors. The NNAT costs a ton of money to hold, isn't used in the fashion that FCPS wants it used, and is easy for parents to prep their kids for so the scores are not really representative of anything for a decent percentage of the kids. So why should they keep it?

I would hope that the school board was spending time on the recommendations that struck me as most useful, ending parent referral and ending appeals since those are used disproportionately by UMC families. The other recommendation was if referrals were dropped that the in-pool test score be lowered from the normal 132 or that any child in the top 10% of their individual schools scores should be considered in-pool.

How the heck do you prep for the NNAT?

There are courses taught at the same places that prep for the CogAT and other tests. And workbooks. And websites. I know this because when I googled NNAT after we got the results back to figure out what the NNAT even was. The first bunch of sites were all prep sites.