Reply to Cogat Score VQN vs. quantitative battery

Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)

Reply to "Cogat Score VQN vs. quantitative battery"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Q and V are important. Strong Q, but weak V suggests that the kid belongs in Level 3 instantly of full term AAP.[/quote]

I am not sure if I agree because there are also other data points. Kid can also have a weak V but strong VALLSS.

What would be a weak V?[/quote]

Is VALLS meaningful for kids at the top? Is it actually being used this way? Doesn’t a strong VALLS simply mean a kid can read?

I think VALLS is a good indicator for finding kids in need of reading intervention. It seems like a poor screener, on the other hand, to determine actual reading ability. My impression is that it wasn’t intended for that use, anyhow. [/quote]

**By “determine reading ability” I mean how well a child can read as opposed to identifying simply whether that child can read.[/quote]

I honestly think nobody knows since it's new this year. I remember our teacher discussing the VALLSS and he said it measures reading comprehension too. Getting back to the question of low V, I think a kid with the "low" V of 120 and over 700 VALLSS will be fine.[/quote]

The comprehension part is auditory. That’s a proxy for reading comprehension, not actual reading comprehension.

I agree you are likely right that the specific child discussed here will be fine. As a parent, it feels frustrating that iready reading has been replaced by a tool that doesn’t have much of a gradient at the top.[/quote]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