Fairfax County GT/AAP Decisions
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
You could call Mantua or the AAP central office to ask. We are in a similar situation, and the AAP central office was able to tell us the time and date of our Center's orientation. The Center school then followed that up with a phone call and apparently a letter that we have not yet received. |
Anonymous
I *think* it's at 2:00 PM. |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
Thanks! I will call the AAP office tomorrow and see if they can help me also. That sounds like when they had it last year too. |
Anonymous
|
I do not know my DD's GBRS, but her tests (all of them were not strong: uniformly 115-120. We paid to get her a WISC, but the score was similar. I was ready to not bother submitting the parental recommendation, and sent an e-mail to the school to that effect.
Her teacher and the AAP resource teacher strongly encouraged me to submit anyway. There view is the tests were not reflecting her ability (which I agree with). I put together 5 strong references, a strong parental form, with specifics of where I think my DD was strong (e.g., she understands my work as a research scientist). And I suspect, the school gave here a good GBRS (she gets all O's and G's). She got in. Scores do not matter 100%. Some kids do not test well. |
Anonymous
i got a rejection note i can not go ellie 2nd grade |
Anonymous
|
[quote=Anonymous]I'm convinced my child got in based on GBRS and teacher recommendations. We did not have strong test scores but we had strong support from the school. I also think the recommendation letters and work samples that I put together were pretty persuasive.
As far as working with the school, I think it depends on your teacher and AART and how supportive they are of your child. When I called my child's classroom teacher to discuss the test stores, the teacher was completely in favor of me referring my child and committed to doing as much as possible to help us create a solid screening file. Then I went to school and met with the teacher and we looked at the work samples that were being considered, I asked what kinds of work samples are most useful, and I asked a bunch of other questions about the teacher's experience with what kinds of kid did and didn't get in and what was in their files. That helped me select other things for the file that were complementary and not duplicative of what the teacher was using. I also had a long phone conversation with the AART to ask questions and get guidance on what to emphasize in my submissions. Both of them were very open to working with me, in part b/c they were 100% supportive of me referring my child from the beginning and felt he clearly belonged in the Center despite not testing into the pool. It's a shame that others aren't finding the same level of support at their base schools. If the teacher doesn't believe a child is qualified and therefore isn't supportive of working with the parents on the file, I think that is ok, because the teacher should give his/her professional opinion based on experience with that child and should use the GBRS to do an objective assessment of the child. But it's different if teachers and AARTs just don't want to help parents navigate the process at all, regardless of whether they feel the child is qualified. [/quote] The problem is... the GBRS is NOT 'objective'...it it ENTIRELY subjective and in my opinion, should be discontinued OR weighted in terms of the decision process. Right now it could carry 100% of the decision at the school level and a parent has no way to determine how much it biased the selection process. |
Anonymous
|
PP, I agree. My child's GBRS was 11, which I'm told is "good." But that combined with only one high score (albeit a perfect score) resulted in a rejection. What shocked me was that the GBRS committee at the school was composed of people that do not know my child. It was the principal, assistant principal, counselor and the AART. Mind you, the AART is part time at the school and has apparently never even met my child. I guess she asked the teachers their opinions and asked for specific examples. I just don't get how 4 people who couldn't pick my child out of a line up should have that much influence on her life. It seems incredibly unfair to me.
I know I'm somewhat sour grapes, but I do feel like the AARTs at some schools are so involved and helpful and at other schools, they are there only a couple days a week and seem to be obstrcutionist. I do feel like my DC is getting a raw deal. And when I asked what level 3 services would be available (no LL IV, which would actually thrill me at this point if the school had it), I was told about one thing (wordmasters) and told that my DC may or may not qualify depending on her scores. Then I was told to enroll her in a chess club outside of school to challenge her spatial/perceptive reasoning skills which are outstanding. Apparently, if that's your strength, FCPS (or at least out school) has nothing to offer you. It made me very sad and angry. We will appeal, but the AART gave me the impression it's not likely. I wouldn't care as much about the AAP center if we had local level IV or ANY prospect of her getting some services. I really am not trying to push her into somethign she's not qualified for, but she DID get the scores in certain areas and her WISC scores are higher than they were on the CogAt in the verbal and other areas, so she is clearly not as "average" as they believe her to be. Yes, I'm the parent above whose child is falling between the cracks and I was told I was not advocating for her. For those who believe that, what on earth am I supposed to do now, when that is the answer the school gives me????????????????? |
Anonymous
I have to disagree with you. The GBRS is somewhat subjective in the sense that it's based on the teacher's impressions and interactions with the child, and a different teacher might make different observations and give a different assessment of that same child. However, it's objective in the sense of (hopefully) being fairly unbiased, in that the teacher is not the parent, and presumably does not have a vested interest in the child getting in or not getting in to the Center. The teacher is assessing multiple students for screening, and presumably s/he would want to maintain some level of credibility by consistently assessing students truthfully and as accurately as possible. The GBRS form asks teachers to note how often a child exhibits certain BEHAVIORS - it does not ask them how bright they think the child is or whether they think the child should be in the Center; it lists a behavior and asks them if they observe the child exhibiting this behavior rarely, occasionally, frequently, or consistently. That's an objective standard. I just don't believe there are a lot of qualified kids who are getting sandbagged by teachers who are deliberately or maliciously giving low GBRS scores to kids who deserve to be rated higher. I'm not saying there are no kids who belong in the Center but were not perceived as such by their teachers. I'm not saying there are no bad teachers out there. But by and large, I don't believe teachers are sabotaging kids with the GBRS and therefore the GBRS should be eliminated. Anyway, there is a reason NOTHING is weighted in the selection process and why parents are allowed to submit materials in support of their children. That's your chance to explain why the teacher does not see your child's potential or why your child's classroom performance is not an accurate reflection of his/her abilities. The selection committee is free to and does consider EVERYHING in the file, and if the test scores and other submissions are strong, they can easily choose to discount or disregard a weak GBRS. As someone whose kid did not have the test scores but got in based on the rest of his file, I could take the exact opposite view from yours and say I think the testing should be discontinued. I don't really think it should, but one could certainly argue that standardized testing isn't truly objective either, as lots of extremely bright kids simply aren't skilled in test-taking yet and thus don't perform well on those types of tests, the questions are read aloud and thus it is biased against kids who are more visual than auditory, and that demonstrated achievement in and outside the classroom is a better indicator of which children need the advanced curriculum of the Center and will thrive there. I'm not sure what you mean by "a parent has no way to determine how much the GBRS biased the selection process," IF you are using the term "biased" in a pejorative sense, because that would imply that there's something unfair about the committee considering the GBRS submission. If by "biased" you just mean "influenced," well, parents have no way of knowing how much ANY one item in the child's screening file influenced the committee's decision. My kid's test scores were only 96th percentile, so not low by any means, but not high enough for the automatic screening pool. His scores very well may have biased the selection committee against him, but there's no inherent unfairness in that, even though I don't think his scores reflected his ability. Apparently other things in his file swayed them in favor of finding him eligible. I believe one of those things was the GBRS (though I don't know his GBRS score), because his teacher has made a point of letting me know on multiple occasions throughout the school year about some of the things my child said or did in school that really surprised & impressed the teacher. The bottom line is that there are qualified kids who are quiet or non-participatory in the classroom or for some reason their potential is not being well-identified by their teachers, but they blow everyone away on these standardized tests or have other things in their background that show their qualification for the Center. There are other kids who don't excel in standardized testing (and by "not excel," we're talking about scoring 90-97th percentile rather than 98th & 99th, which is where the automatic pool cuts off), but they shine in other ways that consistently impress their teachers in the classroom and other adults who work with them. The purpose of the screening process is to identify both kinds of kids by obtaining as much information as possible to provide a complete picture of each child. |
Anonymous
|
"Falling through the cracks" I can completely relate to what you wrote. I feel like there is a type of gifted child who is falling through the cracks in this process and it is very disheartening. It is as if the committee is assembling a low-maintenance class of like students. Perhaps they've become more budget minded than needs minded.
PP, I would argue that the GBRS is actually quite subjective. How does one draw the line between "rarely" and "occasionally"? "Occasionally" and "frequently"? What benchmark is used? Would one teacher's "occasionally" be another's "frequently" or even "consistently"? Aside from a few class "stars" who broadcast their brains how often do teachers even get to see this type of behavior in a individual child? When the folks who prepare the GBRS for a child have had even less contact with a child, objectivity virtually evaporates. It allows hearsay and opinion of only one or two teachers to reign supreme. While the GBRS is based in a valid model of behavior, it appears to have become a thinly veiled tool which enables base schools to virtually hand pick which children should receive level IV services. Test scores should be used to identify gifted children who had not otherwise been recognized as such by the school. I suspect there are many gifted children who, for various reasons, do not shine enough in first or second grade to get noticed as such. But from what I've read test scores alone do not cut it. Even the perfect ones. |
Anonymous
|
Is there any evidence that the GBRS is really being weighted more heavily than other components of the screening file, or that it's the determinative factor in keeping kids OUT of the Centers? I'm wondering b/c some of you are so opposed to the use of the GBRS at all, as if schools are purposely keeping kids out of the Centers by giving low GBRS scores. That is not how I understand this process to work, but I am curious whether base schools are truly "handpicking" kids for the Centers using the GBRS and how possible that is. How does the GBRS "reign supreme?" What about the rest of the file?
We all agree that test scores are not a perfect proxy for eligibility for the Center, but they are still useful. What else are the schools and the screening committee supposed to use to round out their picture of each child? I think the GBRS is imperfect, but it is only intended to be one tool among many for evaluating children's eligibility for the Center. And what would be some alternatives for identifying & capturing these "falling through the cracks" children? |
Anonymous
I wholeheartedly agree with this. The GBRS seems to play too much of a role in the selection process, and to call it an "objective" measure is simply laughable. No sour grapes here; my child was admitted, but I was very worried that a low GBRS score could cancel out my child's stellar test scores. That notwithstanding, there does need to be some sort of way to capture those kids who don't test well but really should be in the program. Perhaps there could be two ways to make it in -- one with test scores alone, at a high threshold like 140+, and one with test scores and GBRS considered. That way, those kids who exhibit giftedness on the tests aren't eliminated due to the misfortune of having a teacher who doesn't believe in them, yet there is still an avenue for those kids who don't test well to make it in. |
Anonymous
|
"Falling through the cracks" mom here. PP, my objection is not with the GBRS as a whole. My issue is that the people filling it out do not know my child. I questioned the AART on her opinion of my child and it became clear that she had never even met her. I don't think my child has met the counselor (at least my child didn't seem to think so). My child knows the Principal and Asst. Principal by sight, but I'm not certain they really know her or anything about her. This is her first year at the school. So my objection is to having those particular people, who seem to not know exactly which child mine is, do the GBRS. If it were her homeroom, math and reading teachers, I would think it had more validity.
I think it's difficult when you have a child who is somewhat quiet and not as confident as maybe she should be. No one takes the time to notice. She was in a school with a class size of less than 16 in her last school, so the teachers knew her much better and were much more supportive. |
Anonymous
Since the public doesn't have access to the data, I'd say that any "evidence" is purely anecdotal. There do seem to be a lot of situations, though, where it does seem like a child didn't get in despite having solid test scores. I know of at least two kids who didn't get in initially but were accepted in a subsequent year, and the only difference was mediocre GBRS scores in the first year, followed by much higher GBRS scores in the later year. Both kids have thrived in GT. One of those two kids is now an 8th grader who has been accepted to TJ for next year. I suspect that the "falling through the cracks" children are those who exhibit giftedness in a particular area, but they are somewhat uncomfortable in their current school setting -- say, the shy kid who is very bright in a particular area but otherwise bored in school because of a lack of connection to the material. These might be the very kids who would thrive in a GT program. I doubt that GBRS would help these kids. In fact, it seems to me that these types of kids are likely to receive low GBRS scores. GBRS (with the narrative) certainly would give a more complete picture of a child, but I'm not sure how well suited it is in capturing the kids falling through the cracks. I agree that test scores are not a perfect proxy for eligibility, and neither is GBRS. There is simply no perfect system. |
Anonymous
Who did the GBRS for your child? My understanding is that my child's 2nd grade teacher did the GBRS. |