Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)
Reply to "AAP Equity report"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous]There was a lot of double speak. Like, they said it was good that FCPS used multiple factors and not just test scores, but then went on to say that GBRS is not a psychometrically vetted measure and thus is very arbitrary. Since it is the primary measure for finding kids eligible, this is problematic. They showed that white people take full advantage of parent referrals. When adjusted for test scores, an AA kid is more than 5 times more likely to be selected than a white or Asian kid with the same stats. While URMs are still underrepresented, their representation is increasing. People strongly supported front end services like a robust Young Scholars program to address the achievement gap The people who created the report want to get rid of NNAT since it doesn't give them any info not already provided by CogAT NV, but it still costs a lot. They wanted a real, vetted measure used in place of GBRS. They want to get rid of parent referrals, parental submission of materials into the packet, and substantially reduce appeals, but they also want the in-pool benchmark reduced. The reason for this is that URMs and lower income kids are less likely to take advantage of parent referrals, parent supplied packet materials, and appeals. They want stronger LI, LII, and LIII They want full time AARTs at every school, and maybe extra AART support at Title I schools. They found part time AARTs pretty useless. They also suggested using school-wide norms rather than county wide ones. Like, the top whatever percent of kids in each school would be in AAP. The lowest kids getting accepted had CogAT scores around 90, which is well below average. The mean scores were around a 119 CogAT V, a 126 Q, and a 124 NV. Mean NNAT was lower than that, I think. AAP teachers have complained that the range of learners is too broad, and that they will have kids who are below grade level in the same class as kids who get perfect scores on CogAT. The goals of AAP are unclear on a county wide level. That's the rough summary.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics