Fox Chapel and Drew HGC pilot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a way we can protest against this?...even though we voiced our opposition in meetings last year, it didn't seem to matter. While they are running these "pilot" the kids who are being left out (primarily affecting the white and Asian... and oh if you forgot, Asians are a minority who wont benefit from any of these initiatives... sigh), wont get to go back to 3rd grade again. My second DD is in first grade, I hope they get their sh*t together soon

It has been made clear over and over by MCPS (the superintendent) and by the BOE that closing the 'achievement gap' is a major priority. They are not interested in 'challenging' advanced learners AT ALL. Not a priority. Until that changes, this kind of stuff will continue.

what's the end game here? I find setting "closing the achievement gap" as the primary educational goal troublesome.

[Anonymous]

Closing the 'achievement gap' means that they want to bring the lowest performing students up to higher levels.

Instead, they should be focusing on improving kids at all levels.

[Anonymous]

I am highly suspicious now that the test is so short that there will be a "miraculous" change in the demographics of admitted students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just wanted to report back. My son took the HGC test yesterday. It was very short and had analogies and number patterns on it. Over half of the third graders at our school took it.

I think half the third graders at our school took it too - and my understanding is that only a handful make it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am highly suspicious now that the test is so short that there will be a "miraculous" change in the demographics of admitted students.

Shorter tests are less reliable, this could easily lead to a larger number of URM just due to lucky guessing.

[Anonymous]

We need to define what "short" is. It may be the same time as past years...

[Anonymous]

I am getting this from an 8 year old, but he thinks 30 minutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
We need to define what "short" is. It may be the same time as past years...

There is another thread on this somewhere. This year's test was three sections - each section was 10 minutes. Total test was 30 mins.

[Anonymous]

Also per 8 year old, was on computer

[Anonymous]

Is the pilot test also age normed like the CogAT?

[Anonymous]

30 minutes is short. Not sure how scoring on that will matter.

How many questions in each 10 minute part, if those who took the test can share?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am highly suspicious now that the test is so short that there will be a "miraculous" change in the demographics of admitted students.

Shorter tests are less reliable, this could easily lead to a larger number of URM just due to lucky guessing.

In the past, the administered test was the full-blown CogAt, which is pretty challenging; by the time kids got to the third, and, admittedly, the hardest part, they were spent, even the brightest of them. Now that the test is shorter, the results might improve across the board -- lucky guessing, yes, plus simply having fewer problems to solve - and URMs would have a better chance of scoring high enough to get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
In the past, the administered test was the full-blown CogAt, which is pretty challenging; by the time kids got to the third, and, admittedly, the hardest part, they were spent, even the brightest of them. Now that the test is shorter, the results might improve across the board -- lucky guessing, yes, plus simply having fewer problems to solve - and URMs would have a better chance of scoring high enough to get in.

And this is a good thing because? Wouldn't we want a high bar so the highest kids can try to meet it. Or do we just lower it for everyone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In the past, the administered test was the full-blown CogAt, which is pretty challenging; by the time kids got to the third, and, admittedly, the hardest part, they were spent, even the brightest of them. Now that the test is shorter, the results might improve across the board -- lucky guessing, yes, plus simply having fewer problems to solve - and URMs would have a better chance of scoring high enough to get in.

And this is a good thing because? Wouldn't we want a high bar so the highest kids can try to meet it. Or do we just lower it for everyone?

Because diversity obviously.

[Anonymous]

Obviously