Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I would like to know how many are accepted on appeal.

This depends on the school...

It also depends on how persistent the parents are and how close to being accepted the student was in the first place. If they are rejecting a lot of kids who could do well to make room for URM kids who could do well and the parents are aggressively pursuing it, they keep appealing each year and could get in for 4th or 5th grade if not 3rd grade. I don't think they would let in a kid on appeal whose (average) scores are below the 130 mark though.

Anonymous wrote: I would like to know how many are accepted on appeal.

This depends on the school...

I would like to know how many are accepted on appeal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:May 10th is the postmark date. Good luck everyone!

BTW we're considered European American/Asian American mixed family so I doubt we're getting in after reading the report. Glad I didn't spend 400 bucks on a WISC as well. Fingers crossed, I guess.

AAP Report from May 2020:
An appeals process for placement for gifted services is mandated by Virginia law. In 2018 – 2019,
46% of students screened for Level IV were found ineligible (n=3118). Of those, 19% decided to
appeal the decision (n=587) – 87% of whom were from Asian American or European American
families.

The appeals process also biases the AAP identification process in favor of families that have the time
and means to pursue it. Given that the process mandates that the appeal includes additional
information not considered previously, those that pursue it must have the time, resources, and
motivation to pursue and complete the collection and inclusion of the necessary additional
information. The process also seems to encourage additional test data, obtained at parents’
expense, although AAP staff communicate that additional test data are not necessary for a
successful appeal. This appeals option likely exacerbates disproportional representation in Level IV
services

Is the bolded also from the AAP report from 2020?

Yes, it's from the report as well.

Anonymous wrote:May 10th is the postmark date. Good luck everyone!

BTW we're considered European American/Asian American mixed family so I doubt we're getting in after reading the report. Glad I didn't spend 400 bucks on a WISC as well. Fingers crossed, I guess.

AAP Report from May 2020:
An appeals process for placement for gifted services is mandated by Virginia law. In 2018 – 2019,
46% of students screened for Level IV were found ineligible (n=3118). Of those, 19% decided to
appeal the decision (n=587) – 87% of whom were from Asian American or European American
families.

The appeals process also biases the AAP identification process in favor of families that have the time
and means to pursue it. Given that the process mandates that the appeal includes additional
information not considered previously, those that pursue it must have the time, resources, and
motivation to pursue and complete the collection and inclusion of the necessary additional
information. The process also seems to encourage additional test data, obtained at parents’
expense, although AAP staff communicate that additional test data are not necessary for a
successful appeal. This appeals option likely exacerbates disproportional representation in Level IV
services

Is the bolded also from the AAP report from 2020?

May 10th is the postmark date. Good luck everyone!

BTW we're considered European American/Asian American mixed family so I doubt we're getting in after reading the report. Glad I didn't spend 400 bucks on a WISC as well. Fingers crossed, I guess.

AAP Report from May 2020:
An appeals process for placement for gifted services is mandated by Virginia law. In 2018 – 2019,
46% of students screened for Level IV were found ineligible (n=3118). Of those, 19% decided to
appeal the decision (n=587) – 87% of whom were from Asian American or European American
families.

The appeals process also biases the AAP identification process in favor of families that have the time
and means to pursue it. Given that the process mandates that the appeal includes additional
information not considered previously, those that pursue it must have the time, resources, and
motivation to pursue and complete the collection and inclusion of the necessary additional
information. The process also seems to encourage additional test data, obtained at parents’
expense, although AAP staff communicate that additional test data are not necessary for a
successful appeal. This appeals option likely exacerbates disproportional representation in Level IV
services