Anonymous wrote:2nd grade
Class 1 11/28 in pool 3 admitted
Class 2 10/28 in pool 8 admitted

Guess which class had better GBRS scores
Guess which class teacher professed anti AAP sentiment

Next year 6 more admitted from class 1 with new teacher

That is the system

GBRS enables the abuse

This doesn't surprise me at all.

2nd grade
Class 1 11/28 in pool 3 admitted
Class 2 10/28 in pool 8 admitted

Guess which class had better GBRS scores
Guess which class teacher professed anti AAP sentiment

Next year 6 more admitted from class 1 with new teacher

That is the system

GBRS enables the abuse

The system is flawed. My child got in because we advocated for them and didn’t want them in a general education classroom with the variety of learning needs. They’re not gifted by any stretch.

Anonymous wrote:Our AART told us that the most important factor is that the child’s educational needs cannot be met in the regular classroom.

So, some kids with very high test scores do perfectly fine learning in the regular classroom, but other kids with high scores really need to be in a different classroom situation so that they can focus. Some very bright kids can challenge themselves but some kids need the outside challenge found in the AAP classroom.

The identification process is meant to find the kids that need the AAP classroom to meet their needs because their needs cannot be met in the regular classroom.

That certainly is the party line, but FCPS doesn't follow it at all. Most kids who are admitted into AAP would bloom wherever they're planted. They don't need AAP to meet their needs. Many of the kids who generally would earn lower GBRS scores are exactly the kids who need a program like AAP so they don't fall through the cracks.

Also, at the risk of being an asshole, very few 2nd grade teachers are competent enough to identify giftedness or whether a kid needs a gifted program. Realistically speaking, 2nd grade teachers have an IQ around 110 and are in the field because they love children. They can recognize above average people pleasers who are organized and neat. They wouldn't have the faintest notion of what giftedness looked like if it smacked them upside the head.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone actually know what the criteria is for AAP? Everyone knows at a high level that they look at COGAT, NNAT, GBRS and work samples. Other than that, it's really very unclear. For example, do they take into account things like equity/demographics, report cards, etc.? Is the judgment based on a relative standard (i.e., you need to be in the top X% of students who are referred) or is there an absolute standard (i.e., they will take everyone who meets the requirements)?

From the outside looking in, there seems to be a level of arbitrariness to this whole process and I really just wish there was more transparency to this opaque process. There just seems to be one too many examples where one student with lower COGAT, NNAT and GBRS gets in and another student with higher metrics doesn't get in, even within the same school/center. I realize that these three measures don't provide the complete picture, as there is also the referral statement and the teacher's comments next to the GBRS.

Let me ask you a question: Do you think that test scores alone can determine a child that is in need of accelerated instruction?

DP. Aptitude test scores alone? No. Aptitude + Achievement test scores. Yes. If a kid's Beginning of Year math test and DRA tests both show that the kid is functioning at a higher grade level, then that child should be receiving accelerated instruction. It makes no sense at all for kids who are both 98th+ percentile on the aptitude tests and also functioning a grade level ahead on achievement tests to be denied AAP just because the work samples weren't pretty enough or the teacher didn't "get" the kid or for whatever mysterious reasons the panel didn't like the kid when the kid has both high test scores and high GBRS.

Our AART told us that the most important factor is that the child’s educational needs cannot be met in the regular classroom.

So, some kids with very high test scores do perfectly fine learning in the regular classroom, but other kids with high scores really need to be in a different classroom situation so that they can focus. Some very bright kids can challenge themselves but some kids need the outside challenge found in the AAP classroom.

The identification process is meant to find the kids that need the AAP classroom to meet their needs because their needs cannot be met in the regular classroom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone actually know what the criteria is for AAP? Everyone knows at a high level that they look at COGAT, NNAT, GBRS and work samples. Other than that, it's really very unclear. For example, do they take into account things like equity/demographics, report cards, etc.? Is the judgment based on a relative standard (i.e., you need to be in the top X% of students who are referred) or is there an absolute standard (i.e., they will take everyone who meets the requirements)?

From the outside looking in, there seems to be a level of arbitrariness to this whole process and I really just wish there was more transparency to this opaque process. There just seems to be one too many examples where one student with lower COGAT, NNAT and GBRS gets in and another student with higher metrics doesn't get in, even within the same school/center. I realize that these three measures don't provide the complete picture, as there is also the referral statement and the teacher's comments next to the GBRS.

Let me ask you a question: Do you think that test scores alone can determine a child that is in need of accelerated instruction?

This is OP. No, I don’t think test scores alone can or should make this determination. I very intentionally included GBRS because it is translated to a score but it is based on more subjective measures and I assume based on the teacher’s observations. I think it is good to have different inputs and measures, but I would still like to understand how they come to a decision based on those different factors. I think test scores are a helpful metric in that you don’t have human biases, however, they clearly have their problems, including the fact that one can prep for them. What I don’t like about this process is that it can feel very arbitrary and there is no transparency.

Anonymous wrote:Here's how it works. 100-200 people, comprising AAP teachers, school counselors, AARTs, and more are split into small groups to review files. The criterion for getting in is that over half of the people reviewing your child's file vote that the child should be admitted. The files are viewed holistically, meaning that the same panel might reject someone with high scores and then accept someone with low scores if something else in the file convinced them that kid #2 belongs in AAP but kid #1 doesn't.

But no notes or comparisons that would be subject to ferpa or foia, because they really don't want anyone to see the sausage making

The criteria is your kids application landing on a table where the three people reviewing it decide they like your kid in the 30 seconds that they have to consider their application

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone actually know what the criteria is for AAP? Everyone knows at a high level that they look at COGAT, NNAT, GBRS and work samples. Other than that, it's really very unclear. For example, do they take into account things like equity/demographics, report cards, etc.? Is the judgment based on a relative standard (i.e., you need to be in the top X% of students who are referred) or is there an absolute standard (i.e., they will take everyone who meets the requirements)?

From the outside looking in, there seems to be a level of arbitrariness to this whole process and I really just wish there was more transparency to this opaque process. There just seems to be one too many examples where one student with lower COGAT, NNAT and GBRS gets in and another student with higher metrics doesn't get in, even within the same school/center. I realize that these three measures don't provide the complete picture, as there is also the referral statement and the teacher's comments next to the GBRS.

The Test scores matter for getting in-pool or not. High test scores identify kids to be evaluated regardless of a parents choice to submit an application or not.

After that, I don't think the test scores matter all that much. I have no idea if the work samples mean anything, the last AAP Audit pointed to GBRS mattering the most.

I would say that most of the people whose kids don't get into AAP have lower GBRSs, including several Occasionally Observes. There is the occasional post that a kid with high test scores and high GBRSs was not accepted but those tend to be rare. Most of the kids with high test scores who are not accepted end up with lower GBRSs.

Then people get up in arms about a proxy IQ test showing that a kid who is underperforming in the classroom should be in LIV because THE TEST SCORES ignoring the kids actual performance in the classroom.

The reality is that the Committee seems to be looking for kids who are smart AND doing well in the classroom. They are looking for native intelligence as well as kids who are completing work, curious, and motivated to learn. Education isn't all about the IQ but also the motivation. This angers some parents who are solely focused on test scores but there really isn't much to be done there.

Parents of kids in First and Second grade should be talking to their child about completing the work that is assigned, encouraging them to participate in class, and finding other activities to do once they have completed their work that don't distract the other kids. If you are hearing from your kids Teacher that they are not doing their work and that is an issue, you should be working to correct that with reminders at home that they need to do their work.

Agree with most of this, especially the bolded. I do think test scores matter beyond just pool eligibility, but classroom performance matters more.

To answer the question about race/equity, I suspect good students at lower-SES schools have an advantage because they stand out more to the teacher (and get better GBRS) in classes where many others are academically behind. Students at those schools are also more likely to be URMs, which could explain why URMs are admitted with lower average test scores. I'm not convinced that race is considered per se, as some believe.

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone actually know what the criteria is for AAP? Everyone knows at a high level that they look at COGAT, NNAT, GBRS and work samples. Other than that, it's really very unclear. For example, do they take into account things like equity/demographics, report cards, etc.? Is the judgment based on a relative standard (i.e., you need to be in the top X% of students who are referred) or is there an absolute standard (i.e., they will take everyone who meets the requirements)?

From the outside looking in, there seems to be a level of arbitrariness to this whole process and I really just wish there was more transparency to this opaque process. There just seems to be one too many examples where one student with lower COGAT, NNAT and GBRS gets in and another student with higher metrics doesn't get in, even within the same school/center. I realize that these three measures don't provide the complete picture, as there is also the referral statement and the teacher's comments next to the GBRS.

The Test scores matter for getting in-pool or not. High test scores identify kids to be evaluated regardless of a parents choice to submit an application or not.

After that, I don't think the test scores matter all that much. I have no idea if the work samples mean anything, the last AAP Audit pointed to GBRS mattering the most.

I would say that most of the people whose kids don't get into AAP have lower GBRSs, including several Occasionally Observes. There is the occasional post that a kid with high test scores and high GBRSs was not accepted but those tend to be rare. Most of the kids with high test scores who are not accepted end up with lower GBRSs.

Then people get up in arms about a proxy IQ test showing that a kid who is underperforming in the classroom should be in LIV because THE TEST SCORES ignoring the kids actual performance in the classroom.

The reality is that the Committee seems to be looking for kids who are smart AND doing well in the classroom. They are looking for native intelligence as well as kids who are completing work, curious, and motivated to learn. Education isn't all about the IQ but also the motivation. This angers some parents who are solely focused on test scores but there really isn't much to be done there.

Parents of kids in First and Second grade should be talking to their child about completing the work that is assigned, encouraging them to participate in class, and finding other activities to do once they have completed their work that don't distract the other kids. If you are hearing from your kids Teacher that they are not doing their work and that is an issue, you should be working to correct that with reminders at home that they need to do their work.

Here's how it works. 100-200 people, comprising AAP teachers, school counselors, AARTs, and more are split into small groups to review files. The criterion for getting in is that over half of the people reviewing your child's file vote that the child should be admitted. The files are viewed holistically, meaning that the same panel might reject someone with high scores and then accept someone with low scores if something else in the file convinced them that kid #2 belongs in AAP but kid #1 doesn't.

From what I've seen, having kids in both AAP and ged ed classes, the kids you would expect to be in AAP are in AAP and the kids you would expect to see in gen ed classes are in gen ed classes. These past couple years may have been a bit strange, but in the past, the selection process seems to have been pretty reasonable.

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone actually know what the criteria is for AAP? Everyone knows at a high level that they look at COGAT, NNAT, GBRS and work samples. Other than that, it's really very unclear. For example, do they take into account things like equity/demographics, report cards, etc.? Is the judgment based on a relative standard (i.e., you need to be in the top X% of students who are referred) or is there an absolute standard (i.e., they will take everyone who meets the requirements)?

From the outside looking in, there seems to be a level of arbitrariness to this whole process and I really just wish there was more transparency to this opaque process. There just seems to be one too many examples where one student with lower COGAT, NNAT and GBRS gets in and another student with higher metrics doesn't get in, even within the same school/center. I realize that these three measures don't provide the complete picture, as there is also the referral statement and the teacher's comments next to the GBRS.

Let me ask you a question: Do you think that test scores alone can determine a child that is in need of accelerated instruction?

Does anyone actually know what the criteria is for AAP? Everyone knows at a high level that they look at COGAT, NNAT, GBRS and work samples. Other than that, it's really very unclear. For example, do they take into account things like equity/demographics, report cards, etc.? Is the judgment based on a relative standard (i.e., you need to be in the top X% of students who are referred) or is there an absolute standard (i.e., they will take everyone who meets the requirements)?

From the outside looking in, there seems to be a level of arbitrariness to this whole process and I really just wish there was more transparency to this opaque process. There just seems to be one too many examples where one student with lower COGAT, NNAT and GBRS gets in and another student with higher metrics doesn't get in, even within the same school/center. I realize that these three measures don't provide the complete picture, as there is also the referral statement and the teacher's comments next to the GBRS.