Reply to Did anyone receive an in pool letter?

Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)

Reply to "Did anyone receive an in pool letter?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]They said that in pool is 10% of the school using either NNAT or Cogat. If that’s true I think my kid would be in pool because of 160 NNAT but I haven’t received anything. [/quote]

Who is "they?" In prior years it was reported on this board as an average of NNAT and CogAT, but no one has ever been able to say they were told authoritatively what the format was.[/quote]

There are several other threads on this board where posters suggested that in pool is “either or”, not “and”. So yeah not like an official source or anything. Regardless, no one had posted anything about receiving in pool letter here so it’s safe to assume no one has received anything yet[/quote]

I believe the top 10% was for equity so that the lower SES kids could qualify but I don’t think less kids on the top end should be hurt by this. Maybe make the cutoff higher like 135 AND also add top 10% from schools who don’t have enough kids who make the cutoff.

Is this local top 10% calculation what is delaying things?[/quote]

From what I’ve seen on here, the top 10% based on some calculation of NNAT and CoGAT scores are automatically referred, but the program ends up being about 20% of all students.  Knowing that all in-pool referrals don’t end up getting in, that means over half of these classes are just based on parent referrals (maybe also a couple school referrals, but my understanding is that those are few and far between).  Maybe I’m alone in this, but why only automatically refer 10%?  If they referred say the top 40%, then they could whittle it down from there to 20%.  Parents could still refer if they wanted, if they weren’t in the top 40% or wanted to supplement, and that way you’re not missing a kid that just missed the 10% cutoff whose parents didn’t refer for whatever reason (lack of time/resources/knowledge of the system, language barriers, personal hardships, etc).  Why refer only half of what the program can accept, relying on parent referrals for the remainder?  Feels like gatekeeping to me.  Is the concern with this the resources to put together that many packets?  From what I’ve also seen on here, there are a large number of parent referrals anyways.  But maybe I’m missing something. [/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