AAP decisions in

[Anonymous]

Hi,
Mom of a FCPS 2nd Grader here..
Despite scoring very high in NNAT, NGAT and on every single time on VALS, MAP tests and being in the pool for full time AAP referral from his local school, we found out yesterday that DC is ineligible for full time services for 2026-2027. No doubt disheartening and frustrating for us. Not sure what is the problem. We know the Central Committee uses a "holistic" approach in their selection. We have yet to find out DC's HOPE scale scores.

We are planning on appealing. I have a couple of quick questions about the appeal process and hoping someone can help me out here. Would be interested to get some information based on your experience and recommendations.

1. How high are the chances of a positive outcome from the appeal process?

2. I noticed on the form that kids may sign up for WISC and/or NNAT/ CogAT testing as part of the appeal process. Is it recommended to take the WISC testing over NNAT/CogAT?

3. Regarding the optional parent questionnaire, I noticed on the form that it says to submit the questionnaire if it was not art of the original package submission. Is it recommended to submit a fresh Parent questionnaire?

Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We applied from the private school and didn’t get in. How do we even know if we are “in pool” or not? Is it worth appealing? Also, we are about to change school pyramids and will provide a new address if we appealed. Does it make a difference?

I don’t think private school students can be in pool, that is only for FCPS students who take the ngat at the same time as the rest of their second grade cohort.

Do you think it makes sense to appeal? Also does it make a difference that we applied from Woodson HS pyramid and now we bought a new house and moved to Lake Braddock HS pyramid (which is I think less competitive in terms of parent population)? So when we appeal we will have a new address. Or it doesn’t make a difference?

Moving will not make a difference. If you have a new wisc score, then that might make an appeal worthwhile.

Got it, thank you! We didn’t take WISC. Is there still time for it (given appeal deadline is May 01)? Sorry for dumb questions, I am new to it.

Yes, there’s still time for a WISC and it provides really helpful info on your child’s learning strengths/ weaknesses etc, but I’d call soon to book it. You’ll hear on this forum that the committee will only except GMU for WISC but we had a successful appeal with a private WISC … in addition to submitting new work samples, and other school testing done after the packet was compiled.

Thanks a lot! Can you recommend a provider you used please?

FCPS seems to like GMU. For what it is worth, WISC scores don’t seem to have a lot of success based on what people have posted here.

WISC below 140 usually doesn’t have any weight. If your child can get 145 or above it’s worth submitting. That’s 99.9%.

Yikes 145? I’m sure most of the AAP students would only get a 130-135 if tested. What are they looking for? A prodigy?!

That PP has absolutely no idea what they’re talking about. We appealed w 132 WISC (private, not GMU) and excellent work samples to counter any testing or HOPE “weaknesses.” DC got in on appeal at a high-scoring center.

Can you please share the name of the psychologist where you got testing done? I don’t feel comfortable going to GMU since testing is only done by students there and I prefer a licensed psychologist.

[Anonymous]

Hi,
Mom of a FCPS 2nd Grader here..
Despite scoring very high in NNAT, NGAT and on every single time on VALS, MAP tests and being in the pool for full time AAP referral from his local school, we found out yesterday that DC is ineligible for full time services for 2026-2027. No doubt disheartening and frustrating for us. Not sure what is the problem. We know the Central Committee uses a "holistic" approach in their selection. We have yet to find out DC's HOPE scale scores.

We are planning on appealing. I have a couple of quick questions about the appeal process and hoping someone can help me out here. Would be interested to get some information based on your experience and recommendations.

1. How high are the chances of a positive outcome from the appeal process?

2. Regarding the optional parent questionnaire, I noticed on the form that it says to submit the questionnaire if it was not art of the original package submission. Is it recommended to submit a fresh Parent questionnaire?

Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hi,
Mom of a FCPS 2nd Grader here..
Despite scoring very high in NNAT, NGAT and on every single time on VALS, MAP tests and being in the pool for full time AAP referral from his local school, we found out yesterday that DC is ineligible for full time services for 2026-2027. No doubt disheartening and frustrating for us. Not sure what is the problem. We know the Central Committee uses a "holistic" approach in their selection. We have yet to find out DC's HOPE scale scores.

We are planning on appealing. I have a couple of quick questions about the appeal process and hoping someone can help me out here. Would be interested to get some information based on your experience and recommendations.

1. How high are the chances of a positive outcome from the appeal process?

2. I noticed on the form that kids may sign up for WISC and/or NNAT/ CogAT testing as part of the appeal process. Is it recommended to take the WISC testing over NNAT/CogAT?

3. Regarding the optional parent questionnaire, I noticed on the form that it says to submit the questionnaire if it was not art of the original package submission. Is it recommended to submit a fresh Parent questionnaire?

Thank you.

I don't think a WISC or any other testing would help if the original testing was high. Instead, I'd write a letter explaining why the kid's needs can't be met in a regular classroom. Include some work samples that illustrate advanced ability.
Presumably, your kid had a bad HOPE score or bad work samples. Don't directly contradict the teacher/HOPE, but instead positively explain away some of the deficiencies.

I don't think you can include a fresh questionnaire if you already submitted one in the original application.

No one really knows what the chances are of a positive appeal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hi,
Mom of a FCPS 2nd Grader here..
Despite scoring very high in NNAT, NGAT and on every single time on VALS, MAP tests and being in the pool for full time AAP referral from his local school, we found out yesterday that DC is ineligible for full time services for 2026-2027. No doubt disheartening and frustrating for us. Not sure what is the problem. We know the Central Committee uses a "holistic" approach in their selection. We have yet to find out DC's HOPE scale scores.

We are planning on appealing. I have a couple of quick questions about the appeal process and hoping someone can help me out here. Would be interested to get some information based on your experience and recommendations.

1. How high are the chances of a positive outcome from the appeal process?

2. I noticed on the form that kids may sign up for WISC and/or NNAT/ CogAT testing as part of the appeal process. Is it recommended to take the WISC testing over NNAT/CogAT?

3. Regarding the optional parent questionnaire, I noticed on the form that it says to submit the questionnaire if it was not art of the original package submission. Is it recommended to submit a fresh Parent questionnaire?

Thank you.

If you request the packet, you'll get the HOPE form and you will see the schools samples. This might help you to refresh your questionnaire and select new or additional samples (you are allowed to include more pages) to target specific areas. Search this forum, there are some threads dedicated to appeal with advice and personal stories.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A little birdie with insider knowledge let it slip that the selection committee is far more sophisticated than most parents give them credit for. It seems they’ve developed a quiet but effective method of identifying students who were coached through the process by cross-referencing standardized test scores against in-school work submissions and academic records.

A significant discrepancy between the two tells its own story. When a child’s classroom performance and their test results simply don’t align, the committee notices. And when they notice, they already know.

So all that expensive test prep, the tutors, the prep books, the weekend drilling sessions? The committee has seen it all before. They’ve learned to read between the lines and apparently, they’ve gotten quite good at it.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

That's a load of bunk. They don't know any of that, and it's impossible to deduce it from the file. A lot of prepped kids in enrichment classes have wonderful classroom performance and have been taught how to raise their hands a lot, do neat work, and come across as articulate, advanced, and positive members of the community. Meanwhile, a lot of legitimately gifted kids may perform poorly in the classroom for myriad reasons (undiagnosed LD, boredom, overthinking everything, shyness, etc.). It's much, much easier to prep an above average child to be academically advanced and a good classroom citizen than it is to prep that same child into scoring 99th percentile and higher on multiple standardized tests.
The committee can easily identify above average kids with high executive function who are liked by their teachers. There isn't any magical insight beyond that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A little birdie with insider knowledge let it slip that the selection committee is far more sophisticated than most parents give them credit for. It seems they’ve developed a quiet but effective method of identifying students who were coached through the process by cross-referencing standardized test scores against in-school work submissions and academic records.

A significant discrepancy between the two tells its own story. When a child’s classroom performance and their test results simply don’t align, the committee notices. And when they notice, they already know.

So all that expensive test prep, the tutors, the prep books, the weekend drilling sessions? The committee has seen it all before. They’ve learned to read between the lines and apparently, they’ve gotten quite good at it.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

That's a load of bunk. They don't know any of that, and it's impossible to deduce it from the file. A lot of prepped kids in enrichment classes have wonderful classroom performance and have been taught how to raise their hands a lot, do neat work, and come across as articulate, advanced, and positive members of the community. Meanwhile, a lot of legitimately gifted kids may perform poorly in the classroom for myriad reasons (undiagnosed LD, boredom, overthinking everything, shyness, etc.). It's much, much easier to prep an above average child to be academically advanced and a good classroom citizen than it is to prep that same child into scoring 99th percentile and higher on multiple standardized tests.
The committee can easily identify above average kids with high executive function who are liked by their teachers. There isn't any magical insight beyond that.

Oh wow, a whole paragraph to tell us that gifted kids can be shy and messy. Groundbreaking stuff. Truly, the academic community has been waiting for this revelation.

You’re not wrong that prepped kids can ace a classroom vibe check. But here’s the thing, you just spent five sentences explaining exactly why the committee also uses standardized testing as a counterbalance… which is literally the point everyone else was making. You argued against yourself so thoroughly I almost thought you were being sarcastic.
“The committee can easily identify above average kids with high executive function who are liked by their teachers.” Cool, so you agree the process works for identifying above-average kids, which is what above-average programs are for. AAP isn’t a support group for undiagnosed geniuses who stare at the ceiling. It’s a program, with criteria, that no system will ever apply perfectly.

Also, “a load of bunk” is doing a lot of heavy lifting for someone who then proceeded to make the exact same argument in 200 more words. Next time just say “I agree but I want credit for nuance” and save us all the scroll.

[Anonymous]

Pretty much any AAP Teacher laughs at the notion that the shy kid or the hyper kid is not selected for AAP. Plenty of kids with different personalities are accepted into AAP. Plenty of Teachers can see the smart kid who is shy and not volunteering participating and call on them in class to help them break out of their shell. Or see that the hyper kid bouncing all over the place also grasps the material quickly. THose kids end up in AAP.

I know parents are trying to figure out why their kid wasn't accepted and the answer is we don't know and the theories that people toss out are pretty much always debunked with a number of anecdotal data that says the exact opposite.

Appeal if you want but understand that AAP is not that different then the regular classroom in most schools. The only exception I would say are the kids at Title 1 or near title 1 schools.

[Anonymous]

2nd grade. Very good test scores. Very competitive center. Not in.

My older one is in AAP and is on grade 8 now. Frankly, AAP is NOT for gifted kids. It’s a crap shoot. Depending on which school you attend. Someone here wrote that their child with a 110 NNAT got in. Likely an easier school to get into. My older one’s friends are by no means gifted. Smart, hard workers. Also, had a few friends who didn’t get in until 6th grade!!! Actually super smart kids, very high test scores etc now acing middle school and most likely will easily get into TJ.

Honestly, crap shoot. At the end, they all end up in the same high school and programs unless they go to TJ. The one difference is the peer groups. Other than that, crap shoot,

[Anonymous]

Serious question: why would parents want a child (esp who didn’t get into AAP) to get in?

My child was in-pool and got in, which doesn’t surprise me, but frankly I’m not 100% convinced the added stress is worth it (and we wouldn’t even be changing schools) although their teacher suggested she thought they would like the challenge. My child has a lot of interests outside of academics and I’m just not sold!

[momo1521]

NNAT 153
NGAT 151
Reading : 713 out of 724
Map Math : 98%
Hope : teacher only recommend 2 subjects
Not in

I know another student from the same school but different teacher ,
NNAT : 140
NGAT: 149
Reading : 650/724
Map Math: 99%
Hope : recommend 4 subjects
In

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: why would parents want a child (esp who didn’t get into AAP) to get in?

My child was in-pool and got in, which doesn’t surprise me, but frankly I’m not 100% convinced the added stress is worth it (and we wouldn’t even be changing schools) although their teacher suggested she thought they would like the challenge. My child has a lot of interests outside of academics and I’m just not sold!

Is it that much more stressful? I mean is 3rd grade THAT much harder? My child didn't get in. Her test scores were OK so it didn't come as a surprise. I want her to be in AAP because that is her peer group. She is bored in 2nd grade - and that isn't a reason for AAP, but come on! We can't have another year of her bored.

I'll appeal and expect a NO, but I'm not giving up.

[Anonymous]

momo1521 wrote:NNAT 153
NGAT 151
Reading : 713 out of 724
Map Math : 98%
Hope : teacher only recommend 2 subjects
Not in

I know another student from the same school but different teacher ,
NNAT : 140
NGAT: 149
Reading : 650/724
Map Math: 99%
Hope : recommend 4 subjects
In

But what were the exact HOPE ratings? How strong were the work samples? My child (strong center, not an URM) had lower NNAT, much lower NGAT and similar MAP and VALLSS and is in. I also feel that my supports for the parent questionnaire were strong and specific, but I don't know how much weight it carried. Child was not in-pool. My child was only recommended in Math and Language Arts. Mix of 3 and 4s on 1st and 2nd grade report cards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Serious question: why would parents want a child (esp who didn’t get into AAP) to get in?

My child was in-pool and got in, which doesn’t surprise me, but frankly I’m not 100% convinced the added stress is worth it (and we wouldn’t even be changing schools) although their teacher suggested she thought they would like the challenge. My child has a lot of interests outside of academics and I’m just not sold!

I assume you’re not familiar with the AAP program. It is not that much different from the regular classes. The major difference is the math pacing which mostly picks up towards the end of fourth grade. A lot also depends on the teacher and if they are willing to introduce extensions or PBLs in the AAP classrooms. We are in a highly ranked centre school and the AAP teachers have been a hit or a miss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A little birdie with insider knowledge let it slip that the selection committee is far more sophisticated than most parents give them credit for. It seems they’ve developed a quiet but effective method of identifying students who were coached through the process by cross-referencing standardized test scores against in-school work submissions and academic records.

A significant discrepancy between the two tells its own story. When a child’s classroom performance and their test results simply don’t align, the committee notices. And when they notice, they already know.

So all that expensive test prep, the tutors, the prep books, the weekend drilling sessions? The committee has seen it all before. They’ve learned to read between the lines and apparently, they’ve gotten quite good at it.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

That's a load of bunk. They don't know any of that, and it's impossible to deduce it from the file. A lot of prepped kids in enrichment classes have wonderful classroom performance and have been taught how to raise their hands a lot, do neat work, and come across as articulate, advanced, and positive members of the community. Meanwhile, a lot of legitimately gifted kids may perform poorly in the classroom for myriad reasons (undiagnosed LD, boredom, overthinking everything, shyness, etc.). It's much, much easier to prep an above average child to be academically advanced and a good classroom citizen than it is to prep that same child into scoring 99th percentile and higher on multiple standardized tests.
The committee can easily identify above average kids with high executive function who are liked by their teachers. There isn't any magical insight beyond that.

Oh wow, a whole paragraph to tell us that gifted kids can be shy and messy. Groundbreaking stuff. Truly, the academic community has been waiting for this revelation.

You’re not wrong that prepped kids can ace a classroom vibe check. But here’s the thing, you just spent five sentences explaining exactly why the committee also uses standardized testing as a counterbalance… which is literally the point everyone else was making. You argued against yourself so thoroughly I almost thought you were being sarcastic.
“The committee can easily identify above average kids with high executive function who are liked by their teachers.” Cool, so you agree the process works for identifying above-average kids, which is what above-average programs are for. AAP isn’t a support group for undiagnosed geniuses who stare at the ceiling. It’s a program, with criteria, that no system will ever apply perfectly.

Also, “a load of bunk” is doing a lot of heavy lifting for someone who then proceeded to make the exact same argument in 200 more words. Next time just say “I agree but I want credit for nuance” and save us all the scroll.

Oh, don't be obtuse. I didn't agree with anything in your post, which was in fact, a load of bunk.

Anyway, your allegation was that the selection committee is super sophisticated and can suss out the prepped kids. THAT is the load of bunk, since I guess it wasn't somehow clear to you. The committee has no idea, and there is no magical formula to accurately guess at the kids who are prepped. Tons of prepped kids are admitted into AAP. Tons of prepped kids earn lowish scores, despite the prep, and still are admitted into AAP. Non-prepped kids can and do earn high scores on the standardized tests, while still having poor classroom performance. Non-prepped kids who earn high scores on tests can still be disliked and tanked by their teachers. It is impossible from the packet to determine why a kid's profile might be inconsistent.

People are posting on this thread about their kids with high scores who got rejected. It's not very nice of you to imply that their kids were rejected because the committee "knew" that the kids were pretty average and heavily prepped. The system just doesn't work that way.