Reply to FCPS Appeals decision are out

Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)

Reply to "FCPS Appeals decision are out"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Since some people might have missed it, here is a link to the AAP equity report:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BPD4M50C2B1F/$file/FCPS%20final%20report%2005.05.20.pdf

If you scroll down to page 66, you can see average CogAT and NNAT scores of LIV eligible kids broken down by race.  It's very enlightening. For the kids who got accepted to AAP -  CogAT Q score:  Asian mean = 130.95.  AA mean: 119.8   Hispanic mean: 118.9[/quote]

I believe that the report addresses some of that as well. Part of that gap is explained by a gap in enrichment opportunities. Kids who have been read to, speak the language natively, attend enrichment classes or programs (tutoring or robotics or coding club) are likely to score better on those types of tests. we can kvetch all we want about them being IQ tests but additional education and stimulation are going to improve scores on tests like the NNAT, CogAT, and yes, even the WISC.

They also presented some good solutions. Every school should have a full time AART. This would bolster level II and Level III programs at schools. With better Level III programs, there would be less pressure to get a kid who is strong in math but on grade level in LA or strong in LA and on grade level on math into AAP to make sure that the child's strong area receives the attention it deserves.

They also suggested that each school should have its own AAP program and determinations for entrance should be made based on the individual schools population. So schools with highly involved parents invested in enrichment programs will end up with a program that looks different then the Title 1 schools. That would also address a lot of the issues with diversity.

Finally, they recommend not allowing parents to submit additional material, including WISCs, and doing away with appeals. Mainly because there is a real bias towards who is likely to include additional materials and appeal.

The reality is that committee members know how test scores can be increased through enrichment. My son was at an advantage because he did robotics and coding club and chess club after school. It wasn't a math program but it still teaches logical thinking and engineering and mathematical concepts in a fun way. The kid at a Title 1 school was far less likely to even have those programs offered, nevermind joining those programs.

While I have no doubt that the kids scoring in the 140's on the WISC are very smart, I am not going to pretend that families that can afford the WISC have not been providing enrichment which is going to influence how their child does on the WISC. And the kid who is at a Title 1 school who scores a 118 on the CogAT could probably score a good deal higher if they had been as exposed to math and English concepts through their home environment and enrichment programs.

And that is why the committee does not weigh the test scores as highly as you all wish that they would.

AAP needs to be changed but I am not sure that everyone here would be thrilled if the change is that only 10% per grade level is placed in a school based AAP. Because I suspect that how ever they adjust the application process, the competition at the non Title 1 schools will become even greater then it is now. And I doubt too many of you would want to move to the areas with the Title 1 schools to insure that your kid is in AAP. [/quote]

Agreeably, there are many more opportunities in nicer neighborhoods, wealthier areas. Just go to Mclean! Parents have no issue paying whatever because they can. But what about the kids who score high just because? They may live in a wealthy district and be Asian. But why ASSUME they were prepped? And also, Cogat classes are publicly EVERYWHERE. You can buy books right on Amazon. There are virtual classes, in person classes etc. It is obviously out there. Same with the NNATS. So they would literally need to ban these businesses to stop kids from taking these classes because TONS of AAP kids are taking them.  And parents also think, we can afford it, and when others are prepping, why should my kid be left behind? If people can afford it, they will try to give that leg up but I don’t think that is for the AAP Board to decide what the child did and didn’t do. I understand LOWERING the standard for certain groups due to a lack of opportunities. But I do NOT understand RAISING the standard for Asian Americans, for example. This is not fair to the kids who work hard and score well. [/quote]

The classes and books are there and they can't be banned but that is why those scores are discounted. The tests are too easy to prep. The WISC scores are going to be influenced by enrichment opportunities, I am not saying that people are prepping for the WISC, I am saying that if your child is willing to participate in tutoring or interested in/willing to participate in coding, chess, robotics or other similar clubs they are going to learn problem solving techniques and creative thinking that other kids will not. Those skills will help them on tests like the WISC. The committee knows this. So do they take a 140 WISC and other high scores on their own, knowing how they can be influenced and knowing that there is a significant portion of the counties population who cannot afford those enrichment opportunities or to pay for a WISC, or do the weight them with something else?

FCPS's holistic approach weighs the test scores with Teacher input. I don't see too many people with 4CO and a higher CogAT or WISC not being accepted. I do see high test scores with GBRS's that include Occasionally Observe not being accepted. That seems to be a big part of the trend. I get it, parents are annoyed that their kids are bored and need more of a challenge but don't seem to be able to wrap their heads around the fact that the Teachers are not seeing it that way. They don't see the bored genius, they see the kid distracting others who isn't finishing his work. Is that because they are bored or have ADHD or are just not interested in being in school because they are 7. The report says that FCPS needs something better then the GBRSs but do you really think that a kid who is not completing their work and chatting with their neighbors is going to do well on any Teacher observation/evaluation? Your kids Teachers are going to be involved in the selection process.

FCPS is not likely to put a lot of weight on letters of recommendation, the report recommends getting rid of those, because the people writing them are either paid by the parents or are volunteers in a program. Are they really going to rock the boat and say that a child is anything but amazing? If I am a tutor or run an enrichment program or a center, am I going to risk losing a client, maybe more then one if the parent complains about the letter of recommendation that I wrote?

[/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