Level IV clustering

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're in a diverse (not title I) school and I am the child of a non LLIV in a class with LLIV kids. I will say that my child is doing MUCH better in this class than she was in a class with less advanced children. This is a boon for non-AAP kids - everyone is living up to their true potential. My child is in a class with ESOL kids, too, they're doing really well. It's great for ALL kids which is what we should all be wanting out of our school system.

#Sorrynotsorry if this is not what you want to hear.

As a parent of a rising 3rd grader at a similar school setting, this is great to hear. But I’m curious how you know that the ESOL students are doing really well. Do you work in the school?

This is what I gather from check-ins with the teacher and my friend who is a specialist at the school. My other child is in a class with a bunch of troublemakers and his teacher is on the verge of a nervous breakdown - but they're in 1st and from what I've read on DCUM and Reddit, first grade is a mess across the board!

Did I give you the "gotcha moment" you were looking for?

Wasn’t looking for a gotcha moment, but thought you had the inside scoop as a teacher at the school. Defensive much?

Absolutely -- there are so many AAP parents here who put down normal children and their parents. They don't want to hear that including normal kids in their advanced classes is beneficial for EVERYONE. They'll just deny, deny, deny. You can see it in the responses so far. The so-called teacher, for example. Sorry, I'm friends with teachers at our school, and they're not as discrete as that so-called teacher claims she is.

I would argue that there are more parents of non-AAP students here determined to tear down the program out of pure jealousy. It's hard to hear, I know, but not every kid can keep up with the AAP pace. There is nothing wrong with that. But it's a shame when, in the name of equity, the AAP program is diluted to appease these desperate parents.

Having "normal" students in a classroom is not beneficial for everyone. The pace is slowed, the learning is less, and the teacher is unduly burdened.

If it makes you feel better, I'm a parent of an AAP child who wants to tear the program down, because it's ridiculous. The AAP program was already diluted to appease people like you and let you feel like your snowflake is somehow special, rather than being indistinguishable from the LIII kids. Math was constantly slowed down for the AAP kids who struggled to grasp the materials. 6th grade AAP math was merely gen ed math given one year early with no AAP extensions. My kid's reading group was largely ignored due to the AAP kids who were at or below grade level and needed tons of the teacher's time. My AAP kid was bored out of his mind and learned next to nothing. Most of the kids in his AAP classroom would have been perfectly fine in regular gen ed and would have thrived in a cluster model. If a kid is merely one grade level ahead in reading and merely ready for FCPS advanced math, rather than far beyond, that kid is garden variety bright and in no need of a special "gifted" program.

tl;dr. The best solution would be to return AAP to a real gifted program serving only the top 2% of FCPS kids. The rest would be served perfectly well in a cluster setting.

So limit it to kids in-pool or with CogAT scores over? I am pretty sure that a CogAT of 132 is 99th percentile, I am not certain what the lowest 98th percentile score is but I would guess it is between 128 and 130? Or how are you going to determine that?

I wish that FCPS just moved to Advanced Math and Advanced LA and placed kids in the appropriate group. Math becomes Math and Science and LA is Social Studies and LA. We have two groups that kids can move between and can be adjusted based on performance during the school year and testing.

I'm assuming PP meant the top 2% looking at FCPS students students only, which would be quite different than the top 2% of CogAT scorers per the national norms currently reported. Who knows what the top 2% of scores would look like within the FCPS population alone--probably 140+.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're in a diverse (not title I) school and I am the child of a non LLIV in a class with LLIV kids. I will say that my child is doing MUCH better in this class than she was in a class with less advanced children. This is a boon for non-AAP kids - everyone is living up to their true potential. My child is in a class with ESOL kids, too, they're doing really well. It's great for ALL kids which is what we should all be wanting out of our school system.

#Sorrynotsorry if this is not what you want to hear.

As a parent of a rising 3rd grader at a similar school setting, this is great to hear. But I’m curious how you know that the ESOL students are doing really well. Do you work in the school?

This is what I gather from check-ins with the teacher and my friend who is a specialist at the school. My other child is in a class with a bunch of troublemakers and his teacher is on the verge of a nervous breakdown - but they're in 1st and from what I've read on DCUM and Reddit, first grade is a mess across the board!

Did I give you the "gotcha moment" you were looking for?

Wasn’t looking for a gotcha moment, but thought you had the inside scoop as a teacher at the school. Defensive much?

Absolutely -- there are so many AAP parents here who put down normal children and their parents. They don't want to hear that including normal kids in their advanced classes is beneficial for EVERYONE. They'll just deny, deny, deny. You can see it in the responses so far. The so-called teacher, for example. Sorry, I'm friends with teachers at our school, and they're not as discrete as that so-called teacher claims she is.

I would argue that there are more parents of non-AAP students here determined to tear down the program out of pure jealousy. It's hard to hear, I know, but not every kid can keep up with the AAP pace. There is nothing wrong with that. But it's a shame when, in the name of equity, the AAP program is diluted to appease these desperate parents.

Having "normal" students in a classroom is not beneficial for everyone. The pace is slowed, the learning is less, and the teacher is unduly burdened.

If it makes you feel better, I'm a parent of an AAP child who wants to tear the program down, because it's ridiculous. The AAP program was already diluted to appease people like you and let you feel like your snowflake is somehow special, rather than being indistinguishable from the LIII kids. Math was constantly slowed down for the AAP kids who struggled to grasp the materials. 6th grade AAP math was merely gen ed math given one year early with no AAP extensions. My kid's reading group was largely ignored due to the AAP kids who were at or below grade level and needed tons of the teacher's time. My AAP kid was bored out of his mind and learned next to nothing. Most of the kids in his AAP classroom would have been perfectly fine in regular gen ed and would have thrived in a cluster model. If a kid is merely one grade level ahead in reading and merely ready for FCPS advanced math, rather than far beyond, that kid is garden variety bright and in no need of a special "gifted" program.

tl;dr. The best solution would be to return AAP to a real gifted program serving only the top 2% of FCPS kids. The rest would be served perfectly well in a cluster setting.

So limit it to kids in-pool or with CogAT scores over? I am pretty sure that a CogAT of 132 is 99th percentile, I am not certain what the lowest 98th percentile score is but I would guess it is between 128 and 130? Or how are you going to determine that?

I wish that FCPS just moved to Advanced Math and Advanced LA and placed kids in the appropriate group. Math becomes Math and Science and LA is Social Studies and LA. We have two groups that kids can move between and can be adjusted based on performance during the school year and testing.

I'm assuming PP meant the top 2% looking at FCPS students students only, which would be quite different than the top 2% of CogAT scorers per the national norms currently reported. Who knows what the top 2% of scores would look like within the FCPS population alone--probably 140+.

PP here. I meant the top 2% nationally, but not on a low ceiling, vulnerable-to-prep, poor instrument like the CogAT. Realistically speaking, FCPS has at most twice as many legitimately gifted kids as would be expected. So at most, 4% of the kids have an IQ of 130+, and if you're an equity warrior with consistent viewpoints, then clearly FCPS only has the expected 2%. The only reason another 6-8% test at 98th percentile + on CogAT is due to prepping and the use of an instrument with very low ceilings. A FCAG report showed that 19% of the 3rd-6th grade population had a LIV designation, and another 8% were principal placed. That's a ton of kids with IQs in the 115-129 range being placed in self contained gifted classrooms who should be well served in gen ed. It's hardly a surprise that the gifted kids are finding the program too watered down for their needs to be met.

The simplest solution would be Advanced math for the kids who operate best at 1-2 years above grade level. Advanced language arts could serve the kids who are 1-2 years above grade level in language arts. An AAP system would then be able to serve the kids who are 2+ years above grade level and additionally need more depth than is otherwise provided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're in a diverse (not title I) school and I am the child of a non LLIV in a class with LLIV kids. I will say that my child is doing MUCH better in this class than she was in a class with less advanced children. This is a boon for non-AAP kids - everyone is living up to their true potential. My child is in a class with ESOL kids, too, they're doing really well. It's great for ALL kids which is what we should all be wanting out of our school system.

#Sorrynotsorry if this is not what you want to hear.

As a parent of a rising 3rd grader at a similar school setting, this is great to hear. But I’m curious how you know that the ESOL students are doing really well. Do you work in the school?

This is what I gather from check-ins with the teacher and my friend who is a specialist at the school. My other child is in a class with a bunch of troublemakers and his teacher is on the verge of a nervous breakdown - but they're in 1st and from what I've read on DCUM and Reddit, first grade is a mess across the board!

Did I give you the "gotcha moment" you were looking for?

Wasn’t looking for a gotcha moment, but thought you had the inside scoop as a teacher at the school. Defensive much?

Absolutely -- there are so many AAP parents here who put down normal children and their parents. They don't want to hear that including normal kids in their advanced classes is beneficial for EVERYONE. They'll just deny, deny, deny. You can see it in the responses so far. The so-called teacher, for example. Sorry, I'm friends with teachers at our school, and they're not as discrete as that so-called teacher claims she is.

I would argue that there are more parents of non-AAP students here determined to tear down the program out of pure jealousy. It's hard to hear, I know, but not every kid can keep up with the AAP pace. There is nothing wrong with that. But it's a shame when, in the name of equity, the AAP program is diluted to appease these desperate parents.

Having "normal" students in a classroom is not beneficial for everyone. The pace is slowed, the learning is less, and the teacher is unduly burdened.

If it makes you feel better, I'm a parent of an AAP child who wants to tear the program down, because it's ridiculous. The AAP program was already diluted to appease people like you and let you feel like your snowflake is somehow special, rather than being indistinguishable from the LIII kids. Math was constantly slowed down for the AAP kids who struggled to grasp the materials. 6th grade AAP math was merely gen ed math given one year early with no AAP extensions. My kid's reading group was largely ignored due to the AAP kids who were at or below grade level and needed tons of the teacher's time. My AAP kid was bored out of his mind and learned next to nothing. Most of the kids in his AAP classroom would have been perfectly fine in regular gen ed and would have thrived in a cluster model. If a kid is merely one grade level ahead in reading and merely ready for FCPS advanced math, rather than far beyond, that kid is garden variety bright and in no need of a special "gifted" program.

tl;dr. The best solution would be to return AAP to a real gifted program serving only the top 2% of FCPS kids. The rest would be served perfectly well in a cluster setting.

So limit it to kids in-pool or with CogAT scores over? I am pretty sure that a CogAT of 132 is 99th percentile, I am not certain what the lowest 98th percentile score is but I would guess it is between 128 and 130? Or how are you going to determine that?

I wish that FCPS just moved to Advanced Math and Advanced LA and placed kids in the appropriate group. Math becomes Math and Science and LA is Social Studies and LA. We have two groups that kids can move between and can be adjusted based on performance during the school year and testing.

I'm assuming PP meant the top 2% looking at FCPS students students only, which would be quite different than the top 2% of CogAT scorers per the national norms currently reported. Who knows what the top 2% of scores would look like within the FCPS population alone--probably 140+.

PP here. I meant the top 2% nationally, but not on a low ceiling, vulnerable-to-prep, poor instrument like the CogAT. Realistically speaking, FCPS has at most twice as many legitimately gifted kids as would be expected. So at most, 4% of the kids have an IQ of 130+, and if you're an equity warrior with consistent viewpoints, then clearly FCPS only has the expected 2%. The only reason another 6-8% test at 98th percentile + on CogAT is due to prepping and the use of an instrument with very low ceilings. A FCAG report showed that 19% of the 3rd-6th grade population had a LIV designation, and another 8% were principal placed. That's a ton of kids with IQs in the 115-129 range being placed in self contained gifted classrooms who should be well served in gen ed. It's hardly a surprise that the gifted kids are finding the program too watered down for their needs to be met.

The simplest solution would be Advanced math for the kids who operate best at 1-2 years above grade level. Advanced language arts could serve the kids who are 1-2 years above grade level in language arts. An AAP system would then be able to serve the kids who are 2+ years above grade level and additionally need more depth than is otherwise provided.

I have two kids, one 140+ on the WISC test and one 120, both in AAP. The program is set up to include kids in the 98-99 percentile and some kids below that to fill out the cohort. It's expanded recently, maybe too much, but it's always been a large program, by design.

[Anonymous]

AAP has increased from 6% of grade eligible kids in 2001 to 20% now. It has not always been intended to be a large program. Also, since only 2-4% of the FCPS student body has an IQ above 130, then the overwhelming majority of kids in AAP have an IQ less than 130. The bright but not gifted kids aren’t “filling out the cohort.” They’re 80-90% of the cohort.

[Anonymous]

Historically, the GT program had about 5% of students and since the early 2000s has had above 10%. It's always been larger than the top 2%.

In 1964, FCPS created a GT Center program for about 1% of the 3rd through 8th grade students. The Center program expanded fairly quickly to include about 5% of 3rd through 8th grade students, who were selected based on ability test scores. In 1993, FCPS began admitting students to the GT Center program based on a combination of test scores, a Gifted Behaviors Rating Scale form, and other information.

In 2001-02, FCPS started to substantially increase the percentage of students admitted to the GT Center program, and also substituted the Naglieri Non-Verbal Abilities Test (NNAT) for the OLSAT. In 2000, 6.7% of 3rd through 8th grade students attended Centers. That percentage increased to 18% in 2011-12. According to an FCPS Assistant Superintendent, the percentage jumped to 27% in 2012-13.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Historically, the GT program had about 5% of students and since the early 2000s has had above 10%. It's always been larger than the top 2%.

In 1964, FCPS created a GT Center program for about 1% of the 3rd through 8th grade students. The Center program expanded fairly quickly to include about 5% of 3rd through 8th grade students, who were selected based on ability test scores. In 1993, FCPS began admitting students to the GT Center program based on a combination of test scores, a Gifted Behaviors Rating Scale form, and other information.

In 2001-02, FCPS started to substantially increase the percentage of students admitted to the GT Center program, and also substituted the Naglieri Non-Verbal Abilities Test (NNAT) for the OLSAT. In 2000, 6.7% of 3rd through 8th grade students attended Centers. That percentage increased to 18% in 2011-12. According to an FCPS Assistant Superintendent, the percentage jumped to 27% in 2012-13.

PP here, and I don't at all disagree. Fairfax County is much more educated than most places. It's totally plausible that close to 4% of the kids are technically top 2% gifted using national norms. Add another 1-2% of kids who are not technically gifted, but are instead especially advanced, motivated, and out of the norm, and you have a good, solid cohort. 5-6% of kids in AAP makes sense. 20% or more is absurd.

Over half of the kids in my middle of the road SES neighborhood got into AAP. Most of them had test scores around 120, were at most 1 year ahead in reading and math, only got pass advanced on maybe half of their SOLs, didn't qualify for Algebra in 7th grade, and so on. There is zero reason to place kids like this in AAP and have them water the curriculum down for the gifted kids. Any AAP teacher who is being honest will tell you that over half of the kids in their class do not belong in a gifted program and would be very well served in gen ed. Of course, all of the parents of these kids thought their kids were quite gifted, but just "bad test takers."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Historically, the GT program had about 5% of students and since the early 2000s has had above 10%. It's always been larger than the top 2%.

In 1964, FCPS created a GT Center program for about 1% of the 3rd through 8th grade students. The Center program expanded fairly quickly to include about 5% of 3rd through 8th grade students, who were selected based on ability test scores. In 1993, FCPS began admitting students to the GT Center program based on a combination of test scores, a Gifted Behaviors Rating Scale form, and other information.

In 2001-02, FCPS started to substantially increase the percentage of students admitted to the GT Center program, and also substituted the Naglieri Non-Verbal Abilities Test (NNAT) for the OLSAT. In 2000, 6.7% of 3rd through 8th grade students attended Centers. That percentage increased to 18% in 2011-12. According to an FCPS Assistant Superintendent, the percentage jumped to 27% in 2012-13.

PP here, and I don't at all disagree. Fairfax County is much more educated than most places. It's totally plausible that close to 4% of the kids are technically top 2% gifted using national norms. Add another 1-2% of kids who are not technically gifted, but are instead especially advanced, motivated, and out of the norm, and you have a good, solid cohort. 5-6% of kids in AAP makes sense. 20% or more is absurd.

Over half of the kids in my middle of the road SES neighborhood got into AAP. Most of them had test scores around 120, were at most 1 year ahead in reading and math, only got pass advanced on maybe half of their SOLs, didn't qualify for Algebra in 7th grade, and so on. There is zero reason to place kids like this in AAP and have them water the curriculum down for the gifted kids. Any AAP teacher who is being honest will tell you that over half of the kids in their class do not belong in a gifted program and would be very well served in gen ed. Of course, all of the parents of these kids thought their kids were quite gifted, but just "bad test takers."

I’m sorry, but how on earth could you know this about half the kids in the grade level? 1 or 2 that you’re close friends with, maybe. But the rest is purely speculation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Historically, the GT program had about 5% of students and since the early 2000s has had above 10%. It's always been larger than the top 2%.

In 1964, FCPS created a GT Center program for about 1% of the 3rd through 8th grade students. The Center program expanded fairly quickly to include about 5% of 3rd through 8th grade students, who were selected based on ability test scores. In 1993, FCPS began admitting students to the GT Center program based on a combination of test scores, a Gifted Behaviors Rating Scale form, and other information.

In 2001-02, FCPS started to substantially increase the percentage of students admitted to the GT Center program, and also substituted the Naglieri Non-Verbal Abilities Test (NNAT) for the OLSAT. In 2000, 6.7% of 3rd through 8th grade students attended Centers. That percentage increased to 18% in 2011-12. According to an FCPS Assistant Superintendent, the percentage jumped to 27% in 2012-13.

PP here, and I don't at all disagree. Fairfax County is much more educated than most places. It's totally plausible that close to 4% of the kids are technically top 2% gifted using national norms. Add another 1-2% of kids who are not technically gifted, but are instead especially advanced, motivated, and out of the norm, and you have a good, solid cohort. 5-6% of kids in AAP makes sense. 20% or more is absurd.

Over half of the kids in my middle of the road SES neighborhood got into AAP. Most of them had test scores around 120, were at most 1 year ahead in reading and math, only got pass advanced on maybe half of their SOLs, didn't qualify for Algebra in 7th grade, and so on. There is zero reason to place kids like this in AAP and have them water the curriculum down for the gifted kids. Any AAP teacher who is being honest will tell you that over half of the kids in their class do not belong in a gifted program and would be very well served in gen ed. Of course, all of the parents of these kids thought their kids were quite gifted, but just "bad test takers."

There is no school in FCPS where more than 50% of a grade is admitted by the central committee to AAP. So this is untrue and based on nothing but your impressions. You would have no way of knowing anything about their test scores or abilities either. Please stop spreading false information to bolster your theory.

[Anonymous]

Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

Agree that the AAP report was surprising and I found the test scores to be surprisingly far below the "old" cutoffs. Clustering makes sense, in that light, when coupled with center schools for kids nearer to or above the cutoffs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

Wow, you are way too fixated on AAP if you get into such level of detail with your neighborhood clique. Did you journal all this or what? Seems insane. Time to get a life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

Wow, you are way too fixated on AAP if you get into such level of detail with your neighborhood clique. Did you journal all this or what? Seems insane. Time to get a life.

DP. When your kids are in grade school, that's their life, and as a parent, you're interested too. It's not wrong or fixated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. 2 different people misread “neighborhood” as “school”. That’s truly bizarre.

Even more chance then that these assumptions are false. Who knows test scores and reading levels of half the kids in the neighborhood? Move on.

You're crazy. Or you're so antisocial that you don't talk to neighbors of similarly aged kids at the bus stop or at other gatherings or when your kids are playing together. Most likely, you're just trying to cover for your truly terrible reading comprehension by deflecting.

Anyway, they're not assumptions. One parent was quite open that she parent referred her kid, the kid got into AAP, and then washed out in 3rd grade because the math was too hard. Another parent flat out said that her kid got a 119 CogAT composite and didn't get pass advanced on any of the 3rd grade SOLs. One parent consistently asked me for help with her kid's 2nd grade math word problems, because neither she nor her DD could understand how to do them, and my kid was getting them correct. Her kid had a <100 NNAT and a 122 CogAT, which she acknowledged freely. Her kid prepped for the CogAT score, which she also acknowledged. After her kid got accepted into AAP, she wouldn't shut up about how the committee saw something special in her kid, and her kid is truly gifted, despite the bad test scores. Yet another parent said they parent referred their kid. Even after prepping like crazy for the IAAT, the kid told other kids that he only got a 68th percentile. One parent was worried about parent referring for AAP because her kid was completely average in math on all metrics. The kid still got into AAP and then slowed it down for everyone else. All of these kids were the types standing around the bus stop reading Magic Treehouse or the like in 2nd, so we're not talking about very advanced readers.

These are the types of kids getting accepted into AAP, and it's not unexpected. In the old system, under which all of these kids were accepted, 10% of FCPS kids earn scores in the top 2%, many due to prepping. Only 2/3 of those kids get accepted into AAP, meaning 6.7% of the FCPS kids are both in-pool and in AAP. AAP includes 20% of the kids per eligible grade level. The remaining 13.3% of the kids in AAP had scores in the 120s or even lower. The AART at my kids' school flat out said in the parent presentations that parents should refer any kid with over 120 on any subsection of CogAT. If the kid is above average, the school will support their application packet, and most of those will get admitted by the central committee. The AAP equity report pretty deliberately hid the CogAT composite data of admitted kids, but the subscore data they released was honestly quite low. It should be quite apparent to everyone that the majority of kids in AAP are merely somewhat above average.

Wow, you are way too fixated on AAP if you get into such level of detail with your neighborhood clique. Did you journal all this or what? Seems insane. Time to get a life.

DP. When your kids are in grade school, that's their life, and as a parent, you're interested too. It's not wrong or fixated.

NP, I've never discussed scores with my kids' friends parents and would probably not give specifics if asked