Next step if appeal is denied?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A poor NNAT or CoGAT certainly does NOT mean a child is underachieving. You’re assuming that a poor test score reflects achievement. My child received what I considered poor NNAT/CoGAT score and he is certainly not an underachiever. Yet his WISC shows giftedness.

A low GBRS could easily indicate some degree of underachieving or a disconnect with the regular classroom. I don't think any kids were rejected with both a high GBRS and a gifted level WISC in the original application package.

You lumped in GBRS with NNAT and Cogat scores in your original post...you said low NNAT/CoGAT/GBRS...you assumed low scores on the tests equaled low achievement. Also, I also believe that low GBRS doesn’t necessarily indicate low achievement. It simple means the teacher isn’t seeing what she considers gifted behaviors. Gifted behaviors also don’t always correlate with high achievement.

Oh good grief! There were two different posters: One who lumped NNAT/CogAT/GBRS, and one who stated that gifted children who underachieve still belong in AAP. I stand by my statement that kids who are underachieving but gifted "need AAP" the most. As soon as a child is verified as gifted, the NNAT, CogAT, and GBRS should be meaningless. It doesn't matter whether that child is underachieving or not. That child still clearly belongs in an AAP classroom. I'm not sure what the committee is thinking when they're rejecting kids with 130+ WISC.

A gifted level IQ with mediocre screening test scores and a poor GBRS (or poor grades, poor DRA, etc.) could indicate a kid who is completely bored and disengaged with the gen ed classroom. It could mean that the child is somehow failing to meet his or her potential. It still doesn't matter, and the child belongs in a gifted program due to actually being gifted.

Someone gets it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A poor NNAT or CoGAT certainly does NOT mean a child is underachieving. You’re assuming that a poor test score reflects achievement. My child received what I considered poor NNAT/CoGAT score and he is certainly not an underachiever. Yet his WISC shows giftedness.

A low GBRS could easily indicate some degree of underachieving or a disconnect with the regular classroom. I don't think any kids were rejected with both a high GBRS and a gifted level WISC in the original application package.

Now what do you consider a high GBRS? My kid got a 13. Waiting on appeal decision.

you need more than one data point to get accepted. what are Cogat/NNAT score?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A poor NNAT or CoGAT certainly does NOT mean a child is underachieving. You’re assuming that a poor test score reflects achievement. My child received what I considered poor NNAT/CoGAT score and he is certainly not an underachiever. Yet his WISC shows giftedness.

A low GBRS could easily indicate some degree of underachieving or a disconnect with the regular classroom. I don't think any kids were rejected with both a high GBRS and a gifted level WISC in the original application package.

You lumped in GBRS with NNAT and Cogat scores in your original post...you said low NNAT/CoGAT/GBRS...you assumed low scores on the tests equaled low achievement. Also, I also believe that low GBRS doesn’t necessarily indicate low achievement. It simple means the teacher isn’t seeing what she considers gifted behaviors. Gifted behaviors also don’t always correlate with high achievement.

Oh good grief! There were two different posters: One who lumped NNAT/CogAT/GBRS, and one who stated that gifted children who underachieve still belong in AAP. I stand by my statement that kids who are underachieving but gifted "need AAP" the most. As soon as a child is verified as gifted, the NNAT, CogAT, and GBRS should be meaningless. It doesn't matter whether that child is underachieving or not. That child still clearly belongs in an AAP classroom. I'm not sure what the committee is thinking when they're rejecting kids with 130+ WISC.

A gifted level IQ with mediocre screening test scores and a poor GBRS (or poor grades, poor DRA, etc.) could indicate a kid who is completely bored and disengaged with the gen ed classroom. It could mean that the child is somehow failing to meet his or her potential. It still doesn't matter, and the child belongs in a gifted program due to actually being gifted.

I completely agree with you. It’s hard to follow who is who since it’s all anonymous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A poor NNAT or CoGAT certainly does NOT mean a child is underachieving. You’re assuming that a poor test score reflects achievement. My child received what I considered poor NNAT/CoGAT score and he is certainly not an underachiever. Yet his WISC shows giftedness.

A low GBRS could easily indicate some degree of underachieving or a disconnect with the regular classroom. I don't think any kids were rejected with both a high GBRS and a gifted level WISC in the original application package.

Now what do you consider a high GBRS? My kid got a 13. Waiting on appeal decision.

you need more than one data point to get accepted. what are Cogat/NNAT score?

Poor. But WISC shows giftedness, hence the appeal. I don’t ever post actual scores for privacy reasons. Now let’s see what appeal decision is in June.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
A poor NNAT or CoGAT certainly does NOT mean a child is underachieving. You’re assuming that a poor test score reflects achievement. My child received what I considered poor NNAT/CoGAT score and he is certainly not an underachiever. Yet his WISC shows giftedness. [/quote]

A low GBRS could easily indicate some degree of underachieving or a disconnect with the regular classroom. I don't think any kids were rejected with both a high GBRS and a gifted level WISC in the original application package. [/quote]

Now what do you consider a high GBRS? My kid got a 13. Waiting on appeal decision.[/quote]


you need more than one data point to get accepted. what are Cogat/NNAT score?[/quote]

Poor. But WISC shows giftedness, hence the appeal. [b]I don’t ever post actual scores for privacy reasons[/b]. Now let’s see what appeal decision is in June.[/quote]

Smart of you. If you posted the WISC score or the Cogat or NNAT score, we'd be able to figure out who your DC is.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
A poor NNAT or CoGAT certainly does NOT mean a child is underachieving. You’re assuming that a poor test score reflects achievement. My child received what I considered poor NNAT/CoGAT score and he is certainly not an underachiever. Yet his WISC shows giftedness. [/quote]

A low GBRS could easily indicate some degree of underachieving or a disconnect with the regular classroom. I don't think any kids were rejected with both a high GBRS and a gifted level WISC in the original application package. [/quote]

Now what do you consider a high GBRS? My kid got a 13. Waiting on appeal decision.[/quote]


you need more than one data point to get accepted. what are Cogat/NNAT score?[/quote]

Poor. But WISC shows giftedness, hence the appeal. [b]I don’t ever post actual scores for privacy reasons[/b]. Now let’s see what appeal decision is in June.[/quote]

Smart of you. If you posted the WISC score or the Cogat or NNAT score, we'd be able to figure out who your DC is.[/quote]

I have no doubt there are some AARTs trolling this board. Also, I don’t feel a need to post my child’s scores so the vultures of DCUM can attack. Now that is smart!

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
A poor NNAT or CoGAT certainly does NOT mean a child is underachieving. You’re assuming that a poor test score reflects achievement. My child received what I considered poor NNAT/CoGAT score and he is certainly not an underachiever. Yet his WISC shows giftedness. [/quote]

A low GBRS could easily indicate some degree of underachieving or a disconnect with the regular classroom. I don't think any kids were rejected with both a high GBRS and a gifted level WISC in the original application package. [/quote]

Now what do you consider a high GBRS? My kid got a 13. Waiting on appeal decision.[/quote]


you need more than one data point to get accepted. what are Cogat/NNAT score?[/quote]

Poor. But WISC shows giftedness, hence the appeal. [b]I don’t ever post actual scores for privacy reasons[/b]. Now let’s see what appeal decision is in June.[/quote]

Smart of you. If you posted the WISC score or the Cogat or NNAT score, we'd be able to figure out who your DC is.[/quote]

I have no doubt there are some AARTs trolling this board. Also, I don’t feel a need to post my child’s scores so the vultures of DCUM can attack. Now that is smart![/quote]

OMG. Your kid’s AART has not memorized his scores. And you could always put one score up by a point. I once saw someone lost their child’s scores and they were exactly mine. They later
Listed the CogAT subscores which were all different but composite CogAT and NNAT were exactly the same as my kid’s scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP is the system that FCPS uses to meet the State of Virginia's mandate for gifted education. If it's serving the overly-enriched, motivated, bright kids at the expense of gifted kids, that's a huge problem. When kids with 130 + IQ as measured by a licensed psychologist (i.e., kids who are gifted) are not being provided gifted education, then FCPS is failing to meet the state mandate for gifted education.

I agree with you that underachieving gifted kids need something different from AAP in its current form. FCPS is just required to provide that something, rather than tossing those kids into gen ed.

Are y'all getting ready to sue FCPS, even though you haven't even received your appeal results yet?

Quoted PP here:
I'm not going to sue FCPS, since both of my kids got into AAP and I have no sour grapes. I just recognize that most kids in AAP aren't really that smart or that special, and there's so much delusion on this board about being "selected first round." My older child is a bright (like 95th percentile intelligence), motivated kid, and she's very middle of the pack in AAP. I have no delusions that she deserves or needs AAP more than a child with a freaking 140 IQ!! It seems like many parents with bright, non-gifted, hardworking, overly enriched children are latching onto that "first round selection" as some sort of proof that their child is more special or gifted than that child actually is. I can't imagine any other reason why anyone would argue that a child with a 140 IQ doesn't belong in AAP. They also seem to latch onto the notion of the infallibility of the committee, as if selection somehow proves that their child is more gifted than the actually gifted children who were rejected. It really is ridiculous.

There are a lot of really passionate responses on this thread, including your first post. There are posters who are furious with FCPS for not finding their not-in-pool-with-NNAT-or-Cogat-but-now-have-appealed-with-140-WISC kids eligible first round. The anger seems a bit premature to me.

But I think what they are actually angry about is not that their kid was not selected first round but that they have seen here (albeit, on an anonymous message board where anyone can say anything) that there were kids with 130+ WISC V FSIQ scores denied in the first round despite including the WISC in the original package. As such, they are contemplating what feels like a very real possibility of being denied despite gifted-range IQ. I agree that it is premature to be overly worried about it at this point, but if it is in fact true that FCPS is rejecting kids with gifted level IQs, short of actual evidence that specific psychologists are "selling" high IQ scores for the purposes of AAP selection, this is a big problem. And I say this as someone whose kid got in on the first round.

THIS! You are describing me. I have not yet posted in this thread but I am reading and it is infuriating. I am angry. I just don't post. I am angry my child was denied first found with a WISC of 132. I am angry I had to spend more money on a SB where my child scored 137 and I can't take any comfort in that because if they can reject her 132, why not her 137? I'm angry that people on here suggest because she was denied first round she doesn't belong in AAP. That makes no sense to tell someone when you have no idea who their child is or what their IQs are. The committee can make errors. To suggest my child doesn't belong simply because they were denied first round but that children who were admitted first round who don't know their IQs (so admittedly it could be high) but who got in with CogATs and NNAT lower than my child's IQ are somehow more deserving is inaccurate and maddening. We won't sue because we can't afford to but I would see nothing wrong with a family suing FCPS for denying their child with 1, but especially 2, IQ score(s) in the 98% who were denied.

Same here. Denied first round with 134 so appealed with a 144. Seems ridiculous to have to take another (and yes, before anyone asks, different) IQ test when child was already identified as gifted.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
A poor NNAT or CoGAT certainly does NOT mean a child is underachieving. You’re assuming that a poor test score reflects achievement. My child received what I considered poor NNAT/CoGAT score and he is certainly not an underachiever. Yet his WISC shows giftedness. [/quote]

A low GBRS could easily indicate some degree of underachieving or a disconnect with the regular classroom. I don't think any kids were rejected with both a high GBRS and a gifted level WISC in the original application package. [/quote]

Now what do you consider a high GBRS? My kid got a 13. Waiting on appeal decision.[/quote]


you need more than one data point to get accepted. what are Cogat/NNAT score?[/quote]

Poor. But WISC shows giftedness, hence the appeal. [b]I don’t ever post actual scores for privacy reasons[/b]. Now let’s see what appeal decision is in June.[/quote]

Smart of you. If you posted the WISC score or the Cogat or NNAT score, we'd be able to figure out who your DC is.[/quote]

I have no doubt there are some AARTs trolling this board. Also, I don’t feel a need to post my child’s scores so the vultures of DCUM can attack. Now that is smart![/quote]

OMG. Your kid’s AART has not memorized his scores. And you could always put one score up by a point. I once saw someone lost their child’s scores and they were exactly mine. They later
Listed the CogAT subscores which were all different but composite CogAT and NNAT were exactly the same as my kid’s scores. [/quote]

Why do you give a shit about my kid’s exact scores? That’s weird.. I don’t ever post my kid’s picture, name, or scores online for privacy reasons. My kid, decision. If you want to post all over the internet, feel free.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP is the system that FCPS uses to meet the State of Virginia's mandate for gifted education. If it's serving the overly-enriched, motivated, bright kids at the expense of gifted kids, that's a huge problem. When kids with 130 + IQ as measured by a licensed psychologist (i.e., kids who are gifted) are not being provided gifted education, then FCPS is failing to meet the state mandate for gifted education.

I agree with you that underachieving gifted kids need something different from AAP in its current form. FCPS is just required to provide that something, rather than tossing those kids into gen ed.

Are y'all getting ready to sue FCPS, even though you haven't even received your appeal results yet?

Quoted PP here:
I'm not going to sue FCPS, since both of my kids got into AAP and I have no sour grapes. I just recognize that most kids in AAP aren't really that smart or that special, and there's so much delusion on this board about being "selected first round." My older child is a bright (like 95th percentile intelligence), motivated kid, and she's very middle of the pack in AAP. I have no delusions that she deserves or needs AAP more than a child with a freaking 140 IQ!! It seems like many parents with bright, non-gifted, hardworking, overly enriched children are latching onto that "first round selection" as some sort of proof that their child is more special or gifted than that child actually is. I can't imagine any other reason why anyone would argue that a child with a 140 IQ doesn't belong in AAP. They also seem to latch onto the notion of the infallibility of the committee, as if selection somehow proves that their child is more gifted than the actually gifted children who were rejected. It really is ridiculous.

There are a lot of really passionate responses on this thread, including your first post. There are posters who are furious with FCPS for not finding their not-in-pool-with-NNAT-or-Cogat-but-now-have-appealed-with-140-WISC kids eligible first round. The anger seems a bit premature to me.

But I think what they are actually angry about is not that their kid was not selected first round but that they have seen here (albeit, on an anonymous message board where anyone can say anything) that there were kids with 130+ WISC V FSIQ scores denied in the first round despite including the WISC in the original package. As such, they are contemplating what feels like a very real possibility of being denied despite gifted-range IQ. I agree that it is premature to be overly worried about it at this point, but if it is in fact true that FCPS is rejecting kids with gifted level IQs, short of actual evidence that specific psychologists are "selling" high IQ scores for the purposes of AAP selection, this is a big problem. And I say this as someone whose kid got in on the first round.

THIS! You are describing me. I have not yet posted in this thread but I am reading and it is infuriating. I am angry. I just don't post. I am angry my child was denied first found with a WISC of 132. I am angry I had to spend more money on a SB where my child scored 137 and I can't take any comfort in that because if they can reject her 132, why not her 137? I'm angry that people on here suggest because she was denied first round she doesn't belong in AAP. That makes no sense to tell someone when you have no idea who their child is or what their IQs are. The committee can make errors. To suggest my child doesn't belong simply because they were denied first round but that children who were admitted first round who don't know their IQs (so admittedly it could be high) but who got in with CogATs and NNAT lower than my child's IQ are somehow more deserving is inaccurate and maddening. We won't sue because we can't afford to but I would see nothing wrong with a family suing FCPS for denying their child with 1, but especially 2, IQ score(s) in the 98% who were denied.

Same here. Denied first round with 134 so appealed with a 144. Seems ridiculous to have to take another (and yes, before anyone asks, different) IQ test when child was already identified as gifted.

I agree. Complete waste of time and money all around. Is this insanity happening because Carol Horn left?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A poor NNAT or CoGAT certainly does NOT mean a child is underachieving. You’re assuming that a poor test score reflects achievement. My child received what I considered poor NNAT/CoGAT score and he is certainly not an underachiever. Yet his WISC shows giftedness.

A low GBRS could easily indicate some degree of underachieving or a disconnect with the regular classroom. I don't think any kids were rejected with both a high GBRS and a gifted level WISC in the original application package.

Now what do you consider a high GBRS? My kid got a 13. Waiting on appeal decision.

you need more than one data point to get accepted. what are Cogat/NNAT score?

Poor. But WISC shows giftedness, hence the appeal. I don’t ever post actual scores for privacy reasons. Now let’s see what appeal decision is in June.

Smart of you. If you posted the WISC score or the Cogat or NNAT score, we'd be able to figure out who your DC is.

I have no doubt there are some AARTs trolling this board. Also, I don’t feel a need to post my child’s scores so the vultures of DCUM can attack. Now that is smart!

OMG. Your kid’s AART has not memorized his scores. And you could always put one score up by a point. I once saw someone lost their child’s scores and they were exactly mine. They later
Listed the CogAT subscores which were all different but composite CogAT and NNAT were exactly the same as my kid’s scores.

Why do you give a shit about my kid’s exact scores? That’s weird.. I don’t ever post my kid’s picture, name, or scores online for privacy reasons. My kid, decision. If you want to post all over the internet, feel free.

You started by posting the GBRS score but then refuse to post any other scores. That's a high GBRS. We can't tell you much else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP is the system that FCPS uses to meet the State of Virginia's mandate for gifted education. If it's serving the overly-enriched, motivated, bright kids at the expense of gifted kids, that's a huge problem. When kids with 130 + IQ as measured by a licensed psychologist (i.e., kids who are gifted) are not being provided gifted education, then FCPS is failing to meet the state mandate for gifted education.

I agree with you that underachieving gifted kids need something different from AAP in its current form. FCPS is just required to provide that something, rather than tossing those kids into gen ed.

Are y'all getting ready to sue FCPS, even though you haven't even received your appeal results yet?

Quoted PP here:
I'm not going to sue FCPS, since both of my kids got into AAP and I have no sour grapes. I just recognize that most kids in AAP aren't really that smart or that special, and there's so much delusion on this board about being "selected first round." My older child is a bright (like 95th percentile intelligence), motivated kid, and she's very middle of the pack in AAP. I have no delusions that she deserves or needs AAP more than a child with a freaking 140 IQ!! It seems like many parents with bright, non-gifted, hardworking, overly enriched children are latching onto that "first round selection" as some sort of proof that their child is more special or gifted than that child actually is. I can't imagine any other reason why anyone would argue that a child with a 140 IQ doesn't belong in AAP. They also seem to latch onto the notion of the infallibility of the committee, as if selection somehow proves that their child is more gifted than the actually gifted children who were rejected. It really is ridiculous.

There are a lot of really passionate responses on this thread, including your first post. There are posters who are furious with FCPS for not finding their not-in-pool-with-NNAT-or-Cogat-but-now-have-appealed-with-140-WISC kids eligible first round. The anger seems a bit premature to me.

But I think what they are actually angry about is not that their kid was not selected first round but that they have seen here (albeit, on an anonymous message board where anyone can say anything) that there were kids with 130+ WISC V FSIQ scores denied in the first round despite including the WISC in the original package. As such, they are contemplating what feels like a very real possibility of being denied despite gifted-range IQ. I agree that it is premature to be overly worried about it at this point, but if it is in fact true that FCPS is rejecting kids with gifted level IQs, short of actual evidence that specific psychologists are "selling" high IQ scores for the purposes of AAP selection, this is a big problem. And I say this as someone whose kid got in on the first round.

THIS! You are describing me. I have not yet posted in this thread but I am reading and it is infuriating. I am angry. I just don't post. I am angry my child was denied first found with a WISC of 132. I am angry I had to spend more money on a SB where my child scored 137 and I can't take any comfort in that because if they can reject her 132, why not her 137? I'm angry that people on here suggest because she was denied first round she doesn't belong in AAP. That makes no sense to tell someone when you have no idea who their child is or what their IQs are. The committee can make errors. To suggest my child doesn't belong simply because they were denied first round but that children who were admitted first round who don't know their IQs (so admittedly it could be high) but who got in with CogATs and NNAT lower than my child's IQ are somehow more deserving is inaccurate and maddening. We won't sue because we can't afford to but I would see nothing wrong with a family suing FCPS for denying their child with 1, but especially 2, IQ score(s) in the 98% who were denied.

Same here. Denied first round with 134 so appealed with a 144. Seems ridiculous to have to take another (and yes, before anyone asks, different) IQ test when child was already identified as gifted.

I agree. Complete waste of time and money all around. Is this insanity happening because Carol Horn left?

Must be. Who is running the show now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A poor NNAT or CoGAT certainly does NOT mean a child is underachieving. You’re assuming that a poor test score reflects achievement. My child received what I considered poor NNAT/CoGAT score and he is certainly not an underachiever. Yet his WISC shows giftedness.

A low GBRS could easily indicate some degree of underachieving or a disconnect with the regular classroom. I don't think any kids were rejected with both a high GBRS and a gifted level WISC in the original application package.

Now what do you consider a high GBRS? My kid got a 13. Waiting on appeal decision.

you need more than one data point to get accepted. what are Cogat/NNAT score?

Poor. But WISC shows giftedness, hence the appeal. I don’t ever post actual scores for privacy reasons. Now let’s see what appeal decision is in June.

Smart of you. If you posted the WISC score or the Cogat or NNAT score, we'd be able to figure out who your DC is.

I have no doubt there are some AARTs trolling this board. Also, I don’t feel a need to post my child’s scores so the vultures of DCUM can attack. Now that is smart!

OMG. Your kid’s AART has not memorized his scores. And you could always put one score up by a point. I once saw someone lost their child’s scores and they were exactly mine. They later
Listed the CogAT subscores which were all different but composite CogAT and NNAT were exactly the same as my kid’s scores.

Why do you give a shit about my kid’s exact scores? That’s weird.. I don’t ever post my kid’s picture, name, or scores online for privacy reasons. My kid, decision. If you want to post all over the internet, feel free.

You started by posting the GBRS score but then refuse to post any other scores. That's a high GBRS. We can't tell you much else.

I didn’t ask for anything else from anyone on the thread. I am not the OP.

The only reason I posted the GBRS was bc someone equated low CoGAT/NNAt scores with low GBRS. I was showing that a child can have poor test scores but a high GBRS, like in our case (but without posting exact test scores.) Also someone had mentioned a high GBRS was favorable. So I asked what was considered a high GBRS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP is the system that FCPS uses to meet the State of Virginia's mandate for gifted education. If it's serving the overly-enriched, motivated, bright kids at the expense of gifted kids, that's a huge problem. When kids with 130 + IQ as measured by a licensed psychologist (i.e., kids who are gifted) are not being provided gifted education, then FCPS is failing to meet the state mandate for gifted education.

I agree with you that underachieving gifted kids need something different from AAP in its current form. FCPS is just required to provide that something, rather than tossing those kids into gen ed.

Are y'all getting ready to sue FCPS, even though you haven't even received your appeal results yet?

Quoted PP here:
I'm not going to sue FCPS, since both of my kids got into AAP and I have no sour grapes. I just recognize that most kids in AAP aren't really that smart or that special, and there's so much delusion on this board about being "selected first round." My older child is a bright (like 95th percentile intelligence), motivated kid, and she's very middle of the pack in AAP. I have no delusions that she deserves or needs AAP more than a child with a freaking 140 IQ!! It seems like many parents with bright, non-gifted, hardworking, overly enriched children are latching onto that "first round selection" as some sort of proof that their child is more special or gifted than that child actually is. I can't imagine any other reason why anyone would argue that a child with a 140 IQ doesn't belong in AAP. They also seem to latch onto the notion of the infallibility of the committee, as if selection somehow proves that their child is more gifted than the actually gifted children who were rejected. It really is ridiculous.

There are a lot of really passionate responses on this thread, including your first post. There are posters who are furious with FCPS for not finding their not-in-pool-with-NNAT-or-Cogat-but-now-have-appealed-with-140-WISC kids eligible first round. The anger seems a bit premature to me.

But I think what they are actually angry about is not that their kid was not selected first round but that they have seen here (albeit, on an anonymous message board where anyone can say anything) that there were kids with 130+ WISC V FSIQ scores denied in the first round despite including the WISC in the original package. As such, they are contemplating what feels like a very real possibility of being denied despite gifted-range IQ. I agree that it is premature to be overly worried about it at this point, but if it is in fact true that FCPS is rejecting kids with gifted level IQs, short of actual evidence that specific psychologists are "selling" high IQ scores for the purposes of AAP selection, this is a big problem. And I say this as someone whose kid got in on the first round.

THIS! You are describing me. I have not yet posted in this thread but I am reading and it is infuriating. I am angry. I just don't post. I am angry my child was denied first found with a WISC of 132. I am angry I had to spend more money on a SB where my child scored 137 and I can't take any comfort in that because if they can reject her 132, why not her 137? I'm angry that people on here suggest because she was denied first round she doesn't belong in AAP. That makes no sense to tell someone when you have no idea who their child is or what their IQs are. The committee can make errors. To suggest my child doesn't belong simply because they were denied first round but that children who were admitted first round who don't know their IQs (so admittedly it could be high) but who got in with CogATs and NNAT lower than my child's IQ are somehow more deserving is inaccurate and maddening. We won't sue because we can't afford to but I would see nothing wrong with a family suing FCPS for denying their child with 1, but especially 2, IQ score(s) in the 98% who were denied.

Same here. Denied first round with 134 so appealed with a 144. Seems ridiculous to have to take another (and yes, before anyone asks, different) IQ test when child was already identified as gifted.

I agree. Complete waste of time and money all around. Is this insanity happening because Carol Horn left?

Must be. Who is running the show now?

Karen Garza

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP is the system that FCPS uses to meet the State of Virginia's mandate for gifted education. If it's serving the overly-enriched, motivated, bright kids at the expense of gifted kids, that's a huge problem. When kids with 130 + IQ as measured by a licensed psychologist (i.e., kids who are gifted) are not being provided gifted education, then FCPS is failing to meet the state mandate for gifted education.

I agree with you that underachieving gifted kids need something different from AAP in its current form. FCPS is just required to provide that something, rather than tossing those kids into gen ed.

Are y'all getting ready to sue FCPS, even though you haven't even received your appeal results yet?

Quoted PP here:
I'm not going to sue FCPS, since both of my kids got into AAP and I have no sour grapes. I just recognize that most kids in AAP aren't really that smart or that special, and there's so much delusion on this board about being "selected first round." My older child is a bright (like 95th percentile intelligence), motivated kid, and she's very middle of the pack in AAP. I have no delusions that she deserves or needs AAP more than a child with a freaking 140 IQ!! It seems like many parents with bright, non-gifted, hardworking, overly enriched children are latching onto that "first round selection" as some sort of proof that their child is more special or gifted than that child actually is. I can't imagine any other reason why anyone would argue that a child with a 140 IQ doesn't belong in AAP. They also seem to latch onto the notion of the infallibility of the committee, as if selection somehow proves that their child is more gifted than the actually gifted children who were rejected. It really is ridiculous.

There are a lot of really passionate responses on this thread, including your first post. There are posters who are furious with FCPS for not finding their not-in-pool-with-NNAT-or-Cogat-but-now-have-appealed-with-140-WISC kids eligible first round. The anger seems a bit premature to me.

But I think what they are actually angry about is not that their kid was not selected first round but that they have seen here (albeit, on an anonymous message board where anyone can say anything) that there were kids with 130+ WISC V FSIQ scores denied in the first round despite including the WISC in the original package. As such, they are contemplating what feels like a very real possibility of being denied despite gifted-range IQ. I agree that it is premature to be overly worried about it at this point, but if it is in fact true that FCPS is rejecting kids with gifted level IQs, short of actual evidence that specific psychologists are "selling" high IQ scores for the purposes of AAP selection, this is a big problem. And I say this as someone whose kid got in on the first round.

THIS! You are describing me. I have not yet posted in this thread but I am reading and it is infuriating. I am angry. I just don't post. I am angry my child was denied first found with a WISC of 132. I am angry I had to spend more money on a SB where my child scored 137 and I can't take any comfort in that because if they can reject her 132, why not her 137? I'm angry that people on here suggest because she was denied first round she doesn't belong in AAP. That makes no sense to tell someone when you have no idea who their child is or what their IQs are. The committee can make errors. To suggest my child doesn't belong simply because they were denied first round but that children who were admitted first round who don't know their IQs (so admittedly it could be high) but who got in with CogATs and NNAT lower than my child's IQ are somehow more deserving is inaccurate and maddening. We won't sue because we can't afford to but I would see nothing wrong with a family suing FCPS for denying their child with 1, but especially 2, IQ score(s) in the 98% who were denied.

Same here. Denied first round with 134 so appealed with a 144. Seems ridiculous to have to take another (and yes, before anyone asks, different) IQ test when child was already identified as gifted.

I agree. Complete waste of time and money all around. Is this insanity happening because Carol Horn left?

Must be. Who is running the show now?

Karen Garza

Karen Garza is the gifted coordinator? I thought she was the former superintendent?