Reply to AAP Equity report

Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)

Reply to "AAP Equity report"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
I’m the PP quoted and don’t necessarily have my own definition of kids who “shouldn’t be there” but see it mentioned by others, I think from the idea pushy parents get in children some think don’t belong which if that happens is a fault of the process more so than the parents. Or if it means hothoused, prepped kids...getting rid of referrals or appeals doesn’t impact that either. But I tend to think you may be right about lowering in-pool. For reference I have one of those over 130 WISC kids (GMU WISC so IMO legit) who was just barely NOT in pool.[/quote]

I don't at all blame parents for referring their above average kids.  I blame the system for admitting them.  I'd honestly like to see the system stay the same, but with harsher guidelines for accepting kids.  A 120-ish CogAT with a packet indicating that the kid is a bright average, mildly advanced, good student shouldn't be enough to get in (but it is!  At least 4 kids in the neighborhood got in with exactly this profile).

I'd love to see them get rid of the entire review process altogether and instead have a purely numerical system.  FSIQ or GAI of 98th percentile or higher = IN, or average the percentile scores from both an achievement test (MAP test?  something else) and the CogAT.  95th percentile or higher on the combined tests = IN.  They could even still allow some sort of portfolio or packet review for kids who don't have the scores, but admissions via the packet review route should be quite rare.  [/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