Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe it's the top 10% of each school.

Top 10% based on.... ? (NNAT? CogAT? Other things thrown in for good measure?)

Op here. This was my question. Iready included?

OP see the quote I posted. Just NNAT and CogAT.

Posters on this forum have claimed that their AARTs said it was a straight average of the CogAT composite score and the NNAT, but FCPS has not confirmed that. Theoretically it could be any calculation that combines the CogAT and NNAT. It could also change from year to year (or even, if you want to be a conspiracy theorist, school to school).

This is not conspiracy or fiction, “in pool” is based on local norms and absolutely changes year to year and by school under the new revised system.

4+ years ago “in pool” was countywide and the magic number was 132+ on NNAT OR CogAT, but that is no longer the case. the scores of the students at your specific elementary school determine the in-pool cutoff, which is top 10% at your school.

PP here. I've first referred kids to AAP under the old system and last did it last year. I've read the 2020 review. I'm well aware of how this works.

The fact is we know some things about local norms, but we don't know for sure how the local norms are calculated. Do you have a source for "absolutely changes from year to year and by school?" It could easily be a flat average with the top 10% of the school by average being in-pool. That would lead to different cut scores, but be the same formula all the time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IReady not included for pool calculations (at least in years past). It is included now on overall applications though -- I think they look to see if it correlates with strong scores on the other tests.

FWIW neither of my kids were in the pool (one had a 127 NNAT, 132 COGAT; the other had a 136 COGAT and 119 NNAT). Both had double 99th percentile Iready scores and both got in first round to AAP.

My child scored 99th percentile in NNAT. Her math iready was 96th percentile. I know that isn’t low but not super high either.

It feels like my kid was reading BOB books and adding 2+2 and all of a sudden, they are being tested for aptitude and reading comprehension and all this advanced math. My child said the math iready was difficult and did not know multiplication. Also did not do well with money and measurement. These are all topics we don’t do outside of school and also not taught much in school.

My 3rd child got in with an 89th percentile on math for iReady. My 2nd had around 93rd. Only my first "looked" like a classic AAP kid, with high 90th percentile on iReady.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe it's the top 10% of each school.

Top 10% based on.... ? (NNAT? CogAT? Other things thrown in for good measure?)

Op here. This was my question. Iready included?

OP see the quote I posted. Just NNAT and CogAT.

Posters on this forum have claimed that their AARTs said it was a straight average of the CogAT composite score and the NNAT, but FCPS has not confirmed that. Theoretically it could be any calculation that combines the CogAT and NNAT. It could also change from year to year (or even, if you want to be a conspiracy theorist, school to school).

This is not conspiracy or fiction, “in pool” is based on local norms and absolutely changes year to year and by school under the new revised system.

4+ years ago “in pool” was countywide and the magic number was 132+ on NNAT OR CogAT, but that is no longer the case. the scores of the students at your specific elementary school determine the in-pool cutoff, which is top 10% at your school.

To be fair, the 132 from 4 years ago had shifted as well. At one point in time it had been 132 composite score but then moved to a 132 in any of the sub categories.

The score has shifted because FCPS is trying to cast a wide net for who might need the challenge of AAP and whose parents are not referring. This is not an issue at some schools but it is at the less well off schools. The local norms allow the County to address the needs of the kids who are ahead at every ES, even the ones where ahead might be closer to grade level at other schools.

The answer to OPs question is no one knows how they develop the score for each school because FCPS has not told anyone how they develop the score for each school. What we do know is that it is suppose to capture the top 10% of the kids at each school. We don’t know if it is the average of the NNAT and CoGAT or of specific scores in the NNAT and CoGAT or one individual score being above a threshold for that school. We just don’t know. Which is why parents interested in AAP should parent refer because no one has a clue what the formula is for the local norms.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe it's the top 10% of each school.

Top 10% based on.... ? (NNAT? CogAT? Other things thrown in for good measure?)

Op here. This was my question. Iready included?

OP see the quote I posted. Just NNAT and CogAT.

Posters on this forum have claimed that their AARTs said it was a straight average of the CogAT composite score and the NNAT, but FCPS has not confirmed that. Theoretically it could be any calculation that combines the CogAT and NNAT. It could also change from year to year (or even, if you want to be a conspiracy theorist, school to school).

This is not conspiracy or fiction, “in pool” is based on local norms and absolutely changes year to year and by school under the new revised system.

4+ years ago “in pool” was countywide and the magic number was 132+ on NNAT OR CogAT, but that is no longer the case. the scores of the students at your specific elementary school determine the in-pool cutoff, which is top 10% at your school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IReady not included for pool calculations (at least in years past). It is included now on overall applications though -- I think they look to see if it correlates with strong scores on the other tests.

FWIW neither of my kids were in the pool (one had a 127 NNAT, 132 COGAT; the other had a 136 COGAT and 119 NNAT). Both had double 99th percentile Iready scores and both got in first round to AAP.

My child scored 99th percentile in NNAT. Her math iready was 96th percentile. I know that isn’t low but not super high either.

It feels like my kid was reading BOB books and adding 2+2 and all of a sudden, they are being tested for aptitude and reading comprehension and all this advanced math. My child said the math iready was difficult and did not know multiplication. Also did not do well with money and measurement. These are all topics we don’t do outside of school and also not taught much in school.

As I understand it, this is part of the "adaptive" testing. If the children answer the first few questions correctly, they bump up the difficulty level until they hit a wall. It can be frustrating to hear your first or second grader come home and talk about how "hard" the iReady was when it clearly covered topics not even touched on in class. So the children who know that stuff a year or more early are either autodidacts or get some form of supplementation.

Anonymous wrote:IReady not included for pool calculations (at least in years past). It is included now on overall applications though -- I think they look to see if it correlates with strong scores on the other tests.

FWIW neither of my kids were in the pool (one had a 127 NNAT, 132 COGAT; the other had a 136 COGAT and 119 NNAT). Both had double 99th percentile Iready scores and both got in first round to AAP.

My child scored 99th percentile in NNAT. Her math iready was 96th percentile. I know that isn’t low but not super high either.

It feels like my kid was reading BOB books and adding 2+2 and all of a sudden, they are being tested for aptitude and reading comprehension and all this advanced math. My child said the math iready was difficult and did not know multiplication. Also did not do well with money and measurement. These are all topics we don’t do outside of school and also not taught much in school.

IReady not included for pool calculations (at least in years past). It is included now on overall applications though -- I think they look to see if it correlates with strong scores on the other tests.

FWIW neither of my kids were in the pool (one had a 127 NNAT, 132 COGAT; the other had a 136 COGAT and 119 NNAT). Both had double 99th percentile Iready scores and both got in first round to AAP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe it's the top 10% of each school.

Top 10% based on.... ? (NNAT? CogAT? Other things thrown in for good measure?)

Op here. This was my question. Iready included?

OP see the quote I posted. Just NNAT and CogAT.

Posters on this forum have claimed that their AARTs said it was a straight average of the CogAT composite score and the NNAT, but FCPS has not confirmed that. Theoretically it could be any calculation that combines the CogAT and NNAT. It could also change from year to year (or even, if you want to be a conspiracy theorist, school to school).

I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I just want to know how it’s calculated.

My child scored high on NNAT and expect high Cogat. Iready score was not as strong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe it's the top 10% of each school.

Top 10% based on.... ? (NNAT? CogAT? Other things thrown in for good measure?)

Op here. This was my question. Iready included?

OP see the quote I posted. Just NNAT and CogAT.

Posters on this forum have claimed that their AARTs said it was a straight average of the CogAT composite score and the NNAT, but FCPS has not confirmed that. Theoretically it could be any calculation that combines the CogAT and NNAT. It could also change from year to year (or even, if you want to be a conspiracy theorist, school to school).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe it's the top 10% of each school.

Top 10% based on.... ? (NNAT? CogAT? Other things thrown in for good measure?)

Op here. This was my question. Iready included?

Anonymous wrote:I believe it's the top 10% of each school.

Top 10% based on.... ? (NNAT? CogAT? Other things thrown in for good measure?)

I have only heard from this board that they average the CogAT VQN and the NNAT score.

FCPS itself provides the top 10% of each school number:

Universal Screener Referral

The Grade 2 universal screener referral captures the top 10% of students in grade 2. It uses universal testing data from:

NNAT
CogAT

Note: Test scores are not weighted in the holistic process and do not give a complete picture of a student profile.

Each school has a unique group of students who may require advanced differentiation based on one of many measures considered. This referral pathway is also one way to ensure that a student whose family may not yet be familiar with FCPS AAP and the referral process is not missed for consideration.

The Grade 2 universal screener referral is not a determination of eligibility. Multiple pieces of data must be considered in eligibility decision processes (Virginia Department of Education Regulations Governing Educational Services for Gifted Students
).

(https://www.fcps.edu/academics/advanced-academic-programs-aap/family-resources-advanced-academic-program-aap/screening)

Magic.

I believe it's the top 10% of each school.

I have heard rumors but nothing official. Our AART was really vague.