Anonymous wrote:7;49 here. You're welcome. What's needed is DATA to see if what you suggest works (or doesn't). NNAT, Cogat, GBRS is needed for this year's candidates to see if it pans out.

How does the WISC factor in? My 2nd grade DD had her NNAT test in 1st grade and she was not diagnosed or treated for ADHD with anxiety yet. She only scored a 113 on the NNAT but has a recent WISC FSIQ of 148. (We have not received her CogAT from FCPS.) Does that mean she needs to retake the NNAT to get a better average?

7;49 here. You're welcome. What's needed is DATA to see if what you suggest works (or doesn't). NNAT, Cogat, GBRS is needed for this year's candidates to see if it pans out.

I am not 100% sure. I think average might be close.

PP, what do you deem to be the "composite" in this case? The higher of the NNAT and CogAT (composite), or an average of the two scores? Or, is NNAT weighted differently in your view?

07:49: thanks. The real issue is quantifying the weighting between GBRS and test scores. Clearly, if it was just test scores (WISC, for example), the cutoff would be about 125 (maybe lower).... And if it was just GBRS, the cutoff would be between 11 and 13.

What we here about is usually the kids with good scores that do not get in, which probably means low GBRS.

As I said, I think combining (10x GBRS + Composite) > 260 in definitely, 250, not so sure. 220, not in.

Agreed - I'm mom of one kid in AAP (and another one hopefully). I asked RE to comment on whether s/he checked if it works for a single high subscore and I appreciate the comments.

All you naysayers, so WHAT that someone here is attempting an algorithm. I personally think it's a hoot, and if the parents of this years candidates would post scores like last year...we could make this a cool way to pass the time while we sit on pins and needles.

Naysayers...don't like the AAP threads? Don't read 'em!

I'm a geek too and I like your approach. I'm also grateful for the AAP program.

I do not have the data for TJ or Harvard. Here, enough people posted scores, that I was able to develop the approach. It may or may not be correct, though

I'm a geek and I love this kind of stuff. Do another one, OP, let's say for TJ and then UVA and then Harvard.

But you know what Warren Buffett says: "beware of geeks bearing formulas!"

I enjoy stuff like this.

There will be plenty of type A parents pulling out their calculators. This OP is the mother of type A parents.

I understand that you think your theory is cool, but do you seriously think it needed it's own thread?

the hell are you prattling on about?

From what I can tell, the group test scores and GBRS are weighted about the same. It is just that we do not know things like the the mean values of GBRS. However, based on a older report, we can assume the GBRS x 10 is about the same as the test scores. So, a 13 GBRS is like 130 in the cogAT's. That may not be exactly right.

Now, lets assume it is a numbers game.

(GBRS x10 + test scores)/2 > 125 and you are in.

So with a 9 GBRS and 140 test scores, toy are at 115, and not in.

An 11 and 140, and you are in. (these numbers can be constrained from last years reports on the boards).

As an example, my DD had a 15 GBRS, and 120 test score two years ago, so she was in.

I do not know if this is the actual algorithm, as I am reverse engineering it, but it seems to work.

Note that WISC replaces the algorithm. It seems like 128 WISC and you are in regardless of the other factors.