In-Pool Results Thread 2024

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small schools like Vienna elementary have around 50 kids in second, so that would be top 5. Its not per class but per grade. I also think there can be multiple kids with the same score making the top 10% greater than actually 10% of the class.

Then there are large schools that have 200+ kids making the pool larger.

It still speaks to how skewed the FFX area is, if the majority of the top 10 percent of a grade are actually falling within top 2-3 percent or higher, nationally, such that a school cutoff just to be "in pool" is above the 97th (130) or 98th (133-134).

The CogAT national percentiles are based on kids who didn't prep. FCPS isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else. A lot of FCPS people prep, which boosts the scores enough to skew them. This actually happens in every major city with this type of gifted program. Suddenly, an overabundance of kids are in the national top 2% on whatever easily prepped standardized test is being used.

DC is a major metropolitan area and families move to Nova for their schools. We live in a high SES area and our school is filled with well educated parents from Harvard, Princeton, UPenn, UVA, etc. The offspring of these engineers, lawyers and doctors will also test well like their parents. MCPS, FCPS, LCPS, Arlington all have concentrations of well educated people. These are not the same as any normal area.

I see where you’re going with this… but it makes it seem like testing well is genetic. Just gives an icky feeling.

Smart parents have smart kids. It is genetic.

Yeah. That’s the ick.

But it's science. Just like children get their eye and hair color from their parents.

Mmm… Hair and eye color can be pinned down to specific genes - as in scientists can point to specific places on the chromosomes that control those traits. Height, too - though even that is a combination of several different things.

There are plenty of highly educated and achieving parents whose children get dealt the harder hand of a learning deficit. Or parents who don’t recognize the gifts of their high potential child.

The ick comes from the feeling of birthright parents have when it comes to their kids’ ability. Wanting everything and believing the best in your kid - 1,000%. But when you present a zip code and expect that that zip code doesn’t follow the same standard deviation rules as your zip code because that zip code is less educated is flawed. That’s all.

We moved from a high farms area to one of the wealthiest areas and the student population could not be any more different. The old school had a few gifted kids but the peer group just wasn’t there. One of the kids ran circles around my kid at age 5-6. He supposedly doesn’t test well despite seeming really bright. Home was a mess. Parents divorced. He did not have a stable home, always getting into fights, not listening to teachers, into girls at a young age. I’m sure if his parents did puzzles, took him to the library and he tried harder in school, he could have tested better and gotten into AAP. That same kid in our new neighborhood would likely be playing chess, playing lacrosse, skiing, getting math enrichment, playing piano and saxophone, debate and excelling. The kid who was so athletic and so smart who taught himself to read at age 4 is such a waste. I know his mom is suffering from mental illness and verge of homelessness.

The kid who lives in McLean, Oakton or Vienna whose two stable well educated parents enrich them by taking them to museums, buys all sorts of educational puzzles and toys, does not allow screen time or phones and buys a cogat book and does a few practice tests is going to do better. The bar at that school will be higher. The scores will be higher.

That kid, the kid who ran circles around your kid whose mom is on the verge of homelessness. That kid is the kid who needs a gifted program. That doesn’t mean that your kid or a kid from a stable home who does puzzles doesn’t too.

There should be room for all who need it. And there isn’t. The bar should be high for all. And it’s not. But no one is born with it because their parents are smart. That’s the fault. There’s just way WAY more that goes into it. People are more than the sum of their parts. I’d like to think that because I did xyz my kid deserves something. It’s just not true.

I don’t agree with half of what FCPS says (or says they say…). But I don’t think for one second that my kid deserves anything more because I did something right or through good breeding (hello eugenics, ick). Anymore than when my kid makes a mistake or doesn’t get a ‘good ‘ test score it’s because I did something inherently wrong or didn’t take them skiing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small schools like Vienna elementary have around 50 kids in second, so that would be top 5. Its not per class but per grade. I also think there can be multiple kids with the same score making the top 10% greater than actually 10% of the class.

Then there are large schools that have 200+ kids making the pool larger.

It still speaks to how skewed the FFX area is, if the majority of the top 10 percent of a grade are actually falling within top 2-3 percent or higher, nationally, such that a school cutoff just to be "in pool" is above the 97th (130) or 98th (133-134).

The CogAT national percentiles are based on kids who didn't prep. FCPS isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else. A lot of FCPS people prep, which boosts the scores enough to skew them. This actually happens in every major city with this type of gifted program. Suddenly, an overabundance of kids are in the national top 2% on whatever easily prepped standardized test is being used.

DC is a major metropolitan area and families move to Nova for their schools. We live in a high SES area and our school is filled with well educated parents from Harvard, Princeton, UPenn, UVA, etc. The offspring of these engineers, lawyers and doctors will also test well like their parents. MCPS, FCPS, LCPS, Arlington all have concentrations of well educated people. These are not the same as any normal area.

I see where you’re going with this… but it makes it seem like testing well is genetic. Just gives an icky feeling.

Smart parents have smart kids. It is genetic.

Yeah. That’s the ick.

But it's science. Just like children get their eye and hair color from their parents.

Mmm… Hair and eye color can be pinned down to specific genes - as in scientists can point to specific places on the chromosomes that control those traits. Height, too - though even that is a combination of several different things.

There are plenty of highly educated and achieving parents whose children get dealt the harder hand of a learning deficit. Or parents who don’t recognize the gifts of their high potential child.

The ick comes from the feeling of birthright parents have when it comes to their kids’ ability. Wanting everything and believing the best in your kid - 1,000%. But when you present a zip code and expect that that zip code doesn’t follow the same standard deviation rules as your zip code because that zip code is less educated is flawed. That’s all.

We moved from a high farms area to one of the wealthiest areas and the student population could not be any more different. The old school had a few gifted kids but the peer group just wasn’t there. One of the kids ran circles around my kid at age 5-6. He supposedly doesn’t test well despite seeming really bright. Home was a mess. Parents divorced. He did not have a stable home, always getting into fights, not listening to teachers, into girls at a young age. I’m sure if his parents did puzzles, took him to the library and he tried harder in school, he could have tested better and gotten into AAP. That same kid in our new neighborhood would likely be playing chess, playing lacrosse, skiing, getting math enrichment, playing piano and saxophone, debate and excelling. The kid who was so athletic and so smart who taught himself to read at age 4 is such a waste. I know his mom is suffering from mental illness and verge of homelessness.

The kid who lives in McLean, Oakton or Vienna whose two stable well educated parents enrich them by taking them to museums, buys all sorts of educational puzzles and toys, does not allow screen time or phones and buys a cogat book and does a few practice tests is going to do better. The bar at that school will be higher. The scores will be higher.

That kid, the kid who ran circles around your kid whose mom is on the verge of homelessness. That kid is the kid who needs a gifted program. That doesn’t mean that your kid or a kid from a stable home who does puzzles doesn’t too.

There should be room for all who need it. And there isn’t. The bar should be high for all. And it’s not. But no one is born with it because their parents are smart. That’s the fault. There’s just way WAY more that goes into it. People are more than the sum of their parts. I’d like to think that because I did xyz my kid deserves something. It’s just not true.

I don’t agree with half of what FCPS says (or says they say…). But I don’t think for one second that my kid deserves anything more because I did something right or through good breeding (hello eugenics, ick). Anymore than when my kid makes a mistake or doesn’t get a ‘good ‘ test score it’s because I did something inherently wrong or didn’t take them skiing.

I absolutely think that kid should have been in a gifted program. If back then it was 10% per school, I’m sure he would probably have gotten in. His school was a title 1 school. 50% of the school is FARMs. He has a sibling with special needs so a lot of the parents’ attention went to sibling. The divorce was bad and then he was just neglected. I used to reach out but both parents ignored me. I hope he makes it. He was such a smart kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small schools like Vienna elementary have around 50 kids in second, so that would be top 5. Its not per class but per grade. I also think there can be multiple kids with the same score making the top 10% greater than actually 10% of the class.

Then there are large schools that have 200+ kids making the pool larger.

It still speaks to how skewed the FFX area is, if the majority of the top 10 percent of a grade are actually falling within top 2-3 percent or higher, nationally, such that a school cutoff just to be "in pool" is above the 97th (130) or 98th (133-134).

The CogAT national percentiles are based on kids who didn't prep. FCPS isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else. A lot of FCPS people prep, which boosts the scores enough to skew them. This actually happens in every major city with this type of gifted program. Suddenly, an overabundance of kids are in the national top 2% on whatever easily prepped standardized test is being used.

DC is a major metropolitan area and families move to Nova for their schools. We live in a high SES area and our school is filled with well educated parents from Harvard, Princeton, UPenn, UVA, etc. The offspring of these engineers, lawyers and doctors will also test well like their parents. MCPS, FCPS, LCPS, Arlington all have concentrations of well educated people. These are not the same as any normal area.

I see where you’re going with this… but it makes it seem like testing well is genetic. Just gives an icky feeling.

Smart parents have smart kids. It is genetic.

Yeah. That’s the ick.

But it's science. Just like children get their eye and hair color from their parents.

Mmm… Hair and eye color can be pinned down to specific genes - as in scientists can point to specific places on the chromosomes that control those traits. Height, too - though even that is a combination of several different things.

There are plenty of highly educated and achieving parents whose children get dealt the harder hand of a learning deficit. Or parents who don’t recognize the gifts of their high potential child.

The ick comes from the feeling of birthright parents have when it comes to their kids’ ability. Wanting everything and believing the best in your kid - 1,000%. But when you present a zip code and expect that that zip code doesn’t follow the same standard deviation rules as your zip code because that zip code is less educated is flawed. That’s all.

We moved from a high farms area to one of the wealthiest areas and the student population could not be any more different. The old school had a few gifted kids but the peer group just wasn’t there. One of the kids ran circles around my kid at age 5-6. He supposedly doesn’t test well despite seeming really bright. Home was a mess. Parents divorced. He did not have a stable home, always getting into fights, not listening to teachers, into girls at a young age. I’m sure if his parents did puzzles, took him to the library and he tried harder in school, he could have tested better and gotten into AAP. That same kid in our new neighborhood would likely be playing chess, playing lacrosse, skiing, getting math enrichment, playing piano and saxophone, debate and excelling. The kid who was so athletic and so smart who taught himself to read at age 4 is such a waste. I know his mom is suffering from mental illness and verge of homelessness.

The kid who lives in McLean, Oakton or Vienna whose two stable well educated parents enrich them by taking them to museums, buys all sorts of educational puzzles and toys, does not allow screen time or phones and buys a cogat book and does a few practice tests is going to do better. The bar at that school will be higher. The scores will be higher.

That kid, the kid who ran circles around your kid whose mom is on the verge of homelessness. That kid is the kid who needs a gifted program. That doesn’t mean that your kid or a kid from a stable home who does puzzles doesn’t too.

There should be room for all who need it. And there isn’t. The bar should be high for all. And it’s not. But no one is born with it because their parents are smart. That’s the fault. There’s just way WAY more that goes into it. People are more than the sum of their parts. I’d like to think that because I did xyz my kid deserves something. It’s just not true.

I don’t agree with half of what FCPS says (or says they say…). But I don’t think for one second that my kid deserves anything more because I did something right or through good breeding (hello eugenics, ick). Anymore than when my kid makes a mistake or doesn’t get a ‘good ‘ test score it’s because I did something inherently wrong or didn’t take them skiing.

I absolutely think that kid should have been in a gifted program. If back then it was 10% per school, I’m sure he would probably have gotten in. His school was a title 1 school. 50% of the school is FARMs. He has a sibling with special needs so a lot of the parents’ attention went to sibling. The divorce was bad and then he was just neglected. I used to reach out but both parents ignored me. I hope he makes it. He was such a smart kid.

+1 Yes! More of this.

[Anonymous]

Cogat: 159
NNAT: 160
Pyramid: Faifax
In Pool (yes/no): yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small schools like Vienna elementary have around 50 kids in second, so that would be top 5. Its not per class but per grade. I also think there can be multiple kids with the same score making the top 10% greater than actually 10% of the class.

Then there are large schools that have 200+ kids making the pool larger.

It still speaks to how skewed the FFX area is, if the majority of the top 10 percent of a grade are actually falling within top 2-3 percent or higher, nationally, such that a school cutoff just to be "in pool" is above the 97th (130) or 98th (133-134).

The CogAT national percentiles are based on kids who didn't prep. FCPS isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else. A lot of FCPS people prep, which boosts the scores enough to skew them. This actually happens in every major city with this type of gifted program. Suddenly, an overabundance of kids are in the national top 2% on whatever easily prepped standardized test is being used.

DC is a major metropolitan area and families move to Nova for their schools. We live in a high SES area and our school is filled with well educated parents from Harvard, Princeton, UPenn, UVA, etc. The offspring of these engineers, lawyers and doctors will also test well like their parents. MCPS, FCPS, LCPS, Arlington all have concentrations of well educated people. These are not the same as any normal area.

I see where you’re going with this… but it makes it seem like testing well is genetic. Just gives an icky feeling.

I didn't take it as genetic or smart, but rather overachieving and wealthy. I would bet money that if you took a bunch of random, adopted kids, and gave them to the same parents, we would still see similar outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cogat: 159
NNAT: 160
Pyramid: Faifax
In Pool (yes/no): yes

Is that a typo? You meant not in pool right? 😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small schools like Vienna elementary have around 50 kids in second, so that would be top 5. Its not per class but per grade. I also think there can be multiple kids with the same score making the top 10% greater than actually 10% of the class.

Then there are large schools that have 200+ kids making the pool larger.

It still speaks to how skewed the FFX area is, if the majority of the top 10 percent of a grade are actually falling within top 2-3 percent or higher, nationally, such that a school cutoff just to be "in pool" is above the 97th (130) or 98th (133-134).

The CogAT national percentiles are based on kids who didn't prep. FCPS isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else. A lot of FCPS people prep, which boosts the scores enough to skew them. This actually happens in every major city with this type of gifted program. Suddenly, an overabundance of kids are in the national top 2% on whatever easily prepped standardized test is being used.

DC is a major metropolitan area and families move to Nova for their schools. We live in a high SES area and our school is filled with well educated parents from Harvard, Princeton, UPenn, UVA, etc. The offspring of these engineers, lawyers and doctors will also test well like their parents. MCPS, FCPS, LCPS, Arlington all have concentrations of well educated people. These are not the same as any normal area.

I see where you’re going with this… but it makes it seem like testing well is genetic. Just gives an icky feeling.

I didn't take it as genetic or smart, but rather overachieving and wealthy. I would bet money that if you took a bunch of random, adopted kids, and gave them to the same parents, we would still see similar outcomes.

Really? I don’t think any parents with more than 1 kid will agree with this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small schools like Vienna elementary have around 50 kids in second, so that would be top 5. Its not per class but per grade. I also think there can be multiple kids with the same score making the top 10% greater than actually 10% of the class.

Then there are large schools that have 200+ kids making the pool larger.

It still speaks to how skewed the FFX area is, if the majority of the top 10 percent of a grade are actually falling within top 2-3 percent or higher, nationally, such that a school cutoff just to be "in pool" is above the 97th (130) or 98th (133-134).

The CogAT national percentiles are based on kids who didn't prep. FCPS isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else. A lot of FCPS people prep, which boosts the scores enough to skew them. This actually happens in every major city with this type of gifted program. Suddenly, an overabundance of kids are in the national top 2% on whatever easily prepped standardized test is being used.

DC is a major metropolitan area and families move to Nova for their schools. We live in a high SES area and our school is filled with well educated parents from Harvard, Princeton, UPenn, UVA, etc. The offspring of these engineers, lawyers and doctors will also test well like their parents. MCPS, FCPS, LCPS, Arlington all have concentrations of well educated people. These are not the same as any normal area.

I see where you’re going with this… but it makes it seem like testing well is genetic. Just gives an icky feeling.

Smart parents have smart kids. It is genetic.

Yeah. That’s the ick.

So scientific fact gives you the ick?
The fact that there is a genetic component to intelligence is not disputed by anybody.
The dispute is only over how much that innate intelligence can be affected by environmental factors.
The nature vs nature debate. There is absolutely no debate that there is a nature element to it. Just as there is absolutely no debate that there is a nurture element to it.
What the anti-test crowd appears to be saying is that nurture either does not or [/b]should not[/b] affect or be allowed to affect innate intelligence.
What the pro-testing crowd says is that study can improve cognitive ability just as exercise can improve athletic ability.
Sure the innate intelligence will allow for better and faster development of cognitive ability just as athletic talent will allow for better and faster development of athletic ability but it is the combination of the two that creates the resulting ability.

So saying that a region that has one of the highest concentrations of graduate degree holders "isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else" is making a pretty bold and unsubstantiated statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small schools like Vienna elementary have around 50 kids in second, so that would be top 5. Its not per class but per grade. I also think there can be multiple kids with the same score making the top 10% greater than actually 10% of the class.

Then there are large schools that have 200+ kids making the pool larger.

It still speaks to how skewed the FFX area is, if the majority of the top 10 percent of a grade are actually falling within top 2-3 percent or higher, nationally, such that a school cutoff just to be "in pool" is above the 97th (130) or 98th (133-134).

The CogAT national percentiles are based on kids who didn't prep. FCPS isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else. A lot of FCPS people prep, which boosts the scores enough to skew them. This actually happens in every major city with this type of gifted program. Suddenly, an overabundance of kids are in the national top 2% on whatever easily prepped standardized test is being used.

DC is a major metropolitan area and families move to Nova for their schools. We live in a high SES area and our school is filled with well educated parents from Harvard, Princeton, UPenn, UVA, etc. The offspring of these engineers, lawyers and doctors will also test well like their parents. MCPS, FCPS, LCPS, Arlington all have concentrations of well educated people. These are not the same as any normal area.

I see where you’re going with this… but it makes it seem like testing well is genetic. Just gives an icky feeling.

Smart parents have smart kids. It is genetic.

Yeah. That’s the ick.

But it's science. Just like children get their eye and hair color from their parents.

Mmm… Hair and eye color can be pinned down to specific genes - as in scientists can point to specific places on the chromosomes that control those traits. Height, too - though even that is a combination of several different things.

There are plenty of highly educated and achieving parents whose children get dealt the harder hand of a learning deficit. Or parents who don’t recognize the gifts of their high potential child.

The ick comes from the feeling of birthright parents have when it comes to their kids’ ability. Wanting everything and believing the best in your kid - 1,000%. But when you present a zip code and expect that that zip code doesn’t follow the same standard deviation rules as your zip code because that zip code is less educated is flawed. That’s all.

Both nature and nurture affect the end result but it is the end result we are measuring, not some unrealized potential.
IQ is absolutely heritable, there is zero controversy about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small schools like Vienna elementary have around 50 kids in second, so that would be top 5. Its not per class but per grade. I also think there can be multiple kids with the same score making the top 10% greater than actually 10% of the class.

Then there are large schools that have 200+ kids making the pool larger.

It still speaks to how skewed the FFX area is, if the majority of the top 10 percent of a grade are actually falling within top 2-3 percent or higher, nationally, such that a school cutoff just to be "in pool" is above the 97th (130) or 98th (133-134).

The CogAT national percentiles are based on kids who didn't prep. FCPS isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else. A lot of FCPS people prep, which boosts the scores enough to skew them. This actually happens in every major city with this type of gifted program. Suddenly, an overabundance of kids are in the national top 2% on whatever easily prepped standardized test is being used.

DC is a major metropolitan area and families move to Nova for their schools. We live in a high SES area and our school is filled with well educated parents from Harvard, Princeton, UPenn, UVA, etc. The offspring of these engineers, lawyers and doctors will also test well like their parents. MCPS, FCPS, LCPS, Arlington all have concentrations of well educated people. These are not the same as any normal area.

I see where you’re going with this… but it makes it seem like testing well is genetic. Just gives an icky feeling.

Smart parents have smart kids. It is genetic.

Yeah. That’s the ick.

But it's science. Just like children get their eye and hair color from their parents.

Mmm… Hair and eye color can be pinned down to specific genes - as in scientists can point to specific places on the chromosomes that control those traits. Height, too - though even that is a combination of several different things.

There are plenty of highly educated and achieving parents whose children get dealt the harder hand of a learning deficit. Or parents who don’t recognize the gifts of their high potential child.

The ick comes from the feeling of birthright parents have when it comes to their kids’ ability. Wanting everything and believing the best in your kid - 1,000%. But when you present a zip code and expect that that zip code doesn’t follow the same standard deviation rules as your zip code because that zip code is less educated is flawed. That’s all.

We moved from a high farms area to one of the wealthiest areas and the student population could not be any more different. The old school had a few gifted kids but the peer group just wasn’t there. One of the kids ran circles around my kid at age 5-6. He supposedly doesn’t test well despite seeming really bright. Home was a mess. Parents divorced. He did not have a stable home, always getting into fights, not listening to teachers, into girls at a young age. I’m sure if his parents did puzzles, took him to the library and he tried harder in school, he could have tested better and gotten into AAP. That same kid in our new neighborhood would likely be playing chess, playing lacrosse, skiing, getting math enrichment, playing piano and saxophone, debate and excelling. The kid who was so athletic and so smart who taught himself to read at age 4 is such a waste. I know his mom is suffering from mental illness and verge of homelessness.

The kid who lives in McLean, Oakton or Vienna whose two stable well educated parents enrich them by taking them to museums, buys all sorts of educational puzzles and toys, does not allow screen time or phones and buys a cogat book and does a few practice tests is going to do better. The bar at that school will be higher. The scores will be higher.

ability = nature + nurture

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small schools like Vienna elementary have around 50 kids in second, so that would be top 5. Its not per class but per grade. I also think there can be multiple kids with the same score making the top 10% greater than actually 10% of the class.

Then there are large schools that have 200+ kids making the pool larger.

It still speaks to how skewed the FFX area is, if the majority of the top 10 percent of a grade are actually falling within top 2-3 percent or higher, nationally, such that a school cutoff just to be "in pool" is above the 97th (130) or 98th (133-134).

The CogAT national percentiles are based on kids who didn't prep. FCPS isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else. A lot of FCPS people prep, which boosts the scores enough to skew them. This actually happens in every major city with this type of gifted program. Suddenly, an overabundance of kids are in the national top 2% on whatever easily prepped standardized test is being used.

DC is a major metropolitan area and families move to Nova for their schools. We live in a high SES area and our school is filled with well educated parents from Harvard, Princeton, UPenn, UVA, etc. The offspring of these engineers, lawyers and doctors will also test well like their parents. MCPS, FCPS, LCPS, Arlington all have concentrations of well educated people. These are not the same as any normal area.

I see where you’re going with this… but it makes it seem like testing well is genetic. Just gives an icky feeling.

Smart parents have smart kids. It is genetic.

Yeah. That’s the ick.

But it's science. Just like children get their eye and hair color from their parents.

Mmm… Hair and eye color can be pinned down to specific genes - as in scientists can point to specific places on the chromosomes that control those traits. Height, too - though even that is a combination of several different things.

There are plenty of highly educated and achieving parents whose children get dealt the harder hand of a learning deficit. Or parents who don’t recognize the gifts of their high potential child.

The ick comes from the feeling of birthright parents have when it comes to their kids’ ability. Wanting everything and believing the best in your kid - 1,000%. But when you present a zip code and expect that that zip code doesn’t follow the same standard deviation rules as your zip code because that zip code is less educated is flawed. That’s all.

We moved from a high farms area to one of the wealthiest areas and the student population could not be any more different. The old school had a few gifted kids but the peer group just wasn’t there. One of the kids ran circles around my kid at age 5-6. He supposedly doesn’t test well despite seeming really bright. Home was a mess. Parents divorced. He did not have a stable home, always getting into fights, not listening to teachers, into girls at a young age. I’m sure if his parents did puzzles, took him to the library and he tried harder in school, he could have tested better and gotten into AAP. That same kid in our new neighborhood would likely be playing chess, playing lacrosse, skiing, getting math enrichment, playing piano and saxophone, debate and excelling. The kid who was so athletic and so smart who taught himself to read at age 4 is such a waste. I know his mom is suffering from mental illness and verge of homelessness.

The kid who lives in McLean, Oakton or Vienna whose two stable well educated parents enrich them by taking them to museums, buys all sorts of educational puzzles and toys, does not allow screen time or phones and buys a cogat book and does a few practice tests is going to do better. The bar at that school will be higher. The scores will be higher.

That kid, the kid who ran circles around your kid whose mom is on the verge of homelessness. That kid is the kid who needs a gifted program. That doesn’t mean that your kid or a kid from a stable home who does puzzles doesn’t too.

He needs better parents. A gifted program without any homer support is not great.
For example, Stuyvesant has a lot of poor kids from poor families and you see large disparities between smart kids with stable homes and smart kids with unstable homes.

There should be room for all who need it. And there isn’t. The bar should be high for all. And it’s not. But no one is born with it because their parents are smart. That’s the fault. There’s just way WAY more that goes into it. People are more than the sum of their parts. I’d like to think that because I did xyz my kid deserves something. It’s just not true.

I don’t agree with half of what FCPS says (or says they say…). But I don’t think for one second that my kid deserves anything more because I did something right or through good breeding (hello eugenics, ick). Anymore than when my kid makes a mistake or doesn’t get a ‘good ‘ test score it’s because I did something inherently wrong or didn’t take them skiing.

They deserve it if they can make the cut. But there shouldn't be a significantly different cut for your kid than my kid. If your kid is ready for calculus, then teach them callculus. If my kid is ready for geometry, you aren't doing him any favors by rushing him up to calculus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cogat: 159
NNAT: 160
Pyramid: Faifax
In Pool (yes/no): yes

Is that a typo? You meant not in pool right? 😂

Huh? Elaborate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cogat: 159
NNAT: 160
Pyramid: Faifax
In Pool (yes/no): yes

Is that a typo? You meant not in pool right? 😂

Huh? Elaborate.

She was joking because the previous posters scores were so high

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small schools like Vienna elementary have around 50 kids in second, so that would be top 5. Its not per class but per grade. I also think there can be multiple kids with the same score making the top 10% greater than actually 10% of the class.

Then there are large schools that have 200+ kids making the pool larger.

It still speaks to how skewed the FFX area is, if the majority of the top 10 percent of a grade are actually falling within top 2-3 percent or higher, nationally, such that a school cutoff just to be "in pool" is above the 97th (130) or 98th (133-134).

The CogAT national percentiles are based on kids who didn't prep. FCPS isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else. A lot of FCPS people prep, which boosts the scores enough to skew them. This actually happens in every major city with this type of gifted program. Suddenly, an overabundance of kids are in the national top 2% on whatever easily prepped standardized test is being used.

DC is a major metropolitan area and families move to Nova for their schools. We live in a high SES area and our school is filled with well educated parents from Harvard, Princeton, UPenn, UVA, etc. The offspring of these engineers, lawyers and doctors will also test well like their parents. MCPS, FCPS, LCPS, Arlington all have concentrations of well educated people. These are not the same as any normal area.

I see where you’re going with this… but it makes it seem like testing well is genetic. Just gives an icky feeling.

Smart parents have smart kids. It is genetic.

Yeah. That’s the ick.

So scientific fact gives you the ick?
The fact that there is a genetic component to intelligence is not disputed by anybody.
The dispute is only over how much that innate intelligence can be affected by environmental factors.
The nature vs nature debate. There is absolutely no debate that there is a nature element to it. Just as there is absolutely no debate that there is a nurture element to it.
What the anti-test crowd appears to be saying is that nurture either does not or [/b]should not[/b] affect or be allowed to affect innate intelligence.
What the pro-testing crowd says is that study can improve cognitive ability just as exercise can improve athletic ability.
Sure the innate intelligence will allow for better and faster development of cognitive ability just as athletic talent will allow for better and faster development of athletic ability but it is the combination of the two that creates the resulting ability.

So saying that a region that has one of the highest concentrations of graduate degree holders "isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else" is making a pretty bold and unsubstantiated statement.

Twice as many gifted kids as expected? Sure. 5 times as many? No way. If we had that many gifted kids, the top 10% in FCPS would be performing at a much higher level than they are. If prepping were completely ineffective, no one would be doing it. A lot of kids who unprepped would score in the 120-130 range are being prepped to the 98th+ percentile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small schools like Vienna elementary have around 50 kids in second, so that would be top 5. Its not per class but per grade. I also think there can be multiple kids with the same score making the top 10% greater than actually 10% of the class.

Then there are large schools that have 200+ kids making the pool larger.

It still speaks to how skewed the FFX area is, if the majority of the top 10 percent of a grade are actually falling within top 2-3 percent or higher, nationally, such that a school cutoff just to be "in pool" is above the 97th (130) or 98th (133-134).

The CogAT national percentiles are based on kids who didn't prep. FCPS isn't that much more gifted than anywhere else. A lot of FCPS people prep, which boosts the scores enough to skew them. This actually happens in every major city with this type of gifted program. Suddenly, an overabundance of kids are in the national top 2% on whatever easily prepped standardized test is being used.

DC is a major metropolitan area and families move to Nova for their schools. We live in a high SES area and our school is filled with well educated parents from Harvard, Princeton, UPenn, UVA, etc. The offspring of these engineers, lawyers and doctors will also test well like their parents. MCPS, FCPS, LCPS, Arlington all have concentrations of well educated people. These are not the same as any normal area.

I see where you’re going with this… but it makes it seem like testing well is genetic. Just gives an icky feeling.

Smart parents have smart kids. It is genetic.

Yeah. That’s the ick.

But it's science. Just like children get their eye and hair color from their parents.

Mmm… Hair and eye color can be pinned down to specific genes - as in scientists can point to specific places on the chromosomes that control those traits. Height, too - though even that is a combination of several different things.

There are plenty of highly educated and achieving parents whose children get dealt the harder hand of a learning deficit. Or parents who don’t recognize the gifts of their high potential child.

The ick comes from the feeling of birthright parents have when it comes to their kids’ ability. Wanting everything and believing the best in your kid - 1,000%. But when you present a zip code and expect that that zip code doesn’t follow the same standard deviation rules as your zip code because that zip code is less educated is flawed. That’s all.

Both nature and nurture affect the end result but it is the end result we are measuring, not some unrealized potential.
IQ is absolutely heritable, there is zero controversy about that.

This is the problem with both AAP admissions and TJ admissions. Both programs are trying to be everything to everyone, rather than being for a specific type of student. Kids who are both very intelligent and very advanced have one set of needs. Kids who are very intelligent but not especially advanced have a different set of needs (whether that's a bad home environment, undiagnosed SNs, etc.. Part of the point of standardized testing is to detect such kids who are high ability but lower achieving) Kids who are academically quite advanced, but due more to effort and nurture have yet another set of needs. The same program or environment is not going to be ideal for all three groups.

There's also a lot of wishful thinking in admissions, where a kid is neither displaying immense raw aptitude nor is the kid especially advanced, but the powers that be desperately want to believe that the kid is a diamond in the rough, since the optics are better.