Yes. Until my hardworking, 137 on NNAT kid is in aap I will push, hard! Gimme a break, teacher. Your Gen Ed coworkers are overwhelmed and only able to focus on the lower end of learning, and my kid suffers.

Anonymous wrote:Will do! Hope you are not my snowflakes aap teacher.

+100

Will do! Hope you are not my snowflakes aap teacher.

AAP is open to any parent who can afford to privately test and push. Does it mean their child belongs there? Absolutely not! so many parents push/appeal and so many students should not be there. As a center AAP teacher I would hazard to guess that two thirds of your very average snowflakes do not belong. No matter what you may think, they are not gifted or advanced. but please push to get them into AA P and make that program even weaker.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ Sorry, should add that we also submitted a Woodcock Johnson, with scores similar to the WISC, with the initial file. Though it may be too late to suggest this for anyone appealing, it may help someone in a future year. But my main point in initially posting was to counter the implication that anyone going to Dr. Dahlgren would get FSIQ 146 when our child's was 20 points lower.

Agreed. I've seen many with their scores in the 120s and low 130s after having their WISC administered by Dr. Dehlgren.

so how do you know this?

Many of my friends had their test taken at Dr. D and the scores really varied.... anywhere from upper 110s to high 140s.

My friend's DC scored 150 on the WISC from George Mason. Should I say.. GMU strikes again? Come on...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ Sorry, should add that we also submitted a Woodcock Johnson, with scores similar to the WISC, with the initial file. Though it may be too late to suggest this for anyone appealing, it may help someone in a future year. But my main point in initially posting was to counter the implication that anyone going to Dr. Dahlgren would get FSIQ 146 when our child's was 20 points lower.

Agreed. I've seen many with their scores in the 120s and low 130s after having their WISC administered by Dr. Dehlgren.

so how do you know this?

Anonymous wrote:^ Sorry, should add that we also submitted a Woodcock Johnson, with scores similar to the WISC, with the initial file. Though it may be too late to suggest this for anyone appealing, it may help someone in a future year. But my main point in initially posting was to counter the implication that anyone going to Dr. Dahlgren would get FSIQ 146 when our child's was 20 points lower.

Agreed. I've seen many with their scores in the 120s and low 130s after having their WISC administered by Dr. Dehlgren.

^ Sorry, should add that we also submitted a Woodcock Johnson, with scores similar to the WISC, with the initial file. Though it may be too late to suggest this for anyone appealing, it may help someone in a future year. But my main point in initially posting was to counter the implication that anyone going to Dr. Dahlgren would get FSIQ 146 when our child's was 20 points lower.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Got FSIQ 126 with Dr. Dahlgren but still thought she was great (interaction with child, explanation of scores, written report). I doubt that anyone has enough data to back up a claim that one tester provides higher scores than others. We chose Dr. Dahlgren -- and later recommended her to others, including on this board -- because she has a special expertise with AAP and previously served on the AAP advisory committee.

^ did your DC get into AAP?

Yes.

Just curious, how would that score get her into AAP? It doesn't suggest extreme intelligence above many other kids at your typical base school here.

I was pleasantly surprised myself. I think that throughout the file, including in GBRS and letters of recommendation, clear areas of strength and interest stood out.

Two years ago there was a JUST THE SCORES appeals thread that compiled in/out scores for about 30 kids. It demonstrated a data trend that WISC score of 126 and GBRS of 10 was about the "breaking point" -- above that, in; below that, out. Of course, this year the bar may be higher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Got FSIQ 126 with Dr. Dahlgren but still thought she was great (interaction with child, explanation of scores, written report). I doubt that anyone has enough data to back up a claim that one tester provides higher scores than others. We chose Dr. Dahlgren -- and later recommended her to others, including on this board -- because she has a special expertise with AAP and previously served on the AAP advisory committee.

^ did your DC get into AAP?

Yes.

Just curious, how would that score get her into AAP? It doesn't suggest extreme intelligence above many other kids at your typical base school here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Got FSIQ 126 with Dr. Dahlgren but still thought she was great (interaction with child, explanation of scores, written report). I doubt that anyone has enough data to back up a claim that one tester provides higher scores than others. We chose Dr. Dahlgren -- and later recommended her to others, including on this board -- because she has a special expertise with AAP and previously served on the AAP advisory committee.

^ did your DC get into AAP?

Yes.

Anonymous wrote:Got FSIQ 126 with Dr. Dahlgren but still thought she was great (interaction with child, explanation of scores, written report). I doubt that anyone has enough data to back up a claim that one tester provides higher scores than others. We chose Dr. Dahlgren -- and later recommended her to others, including on this board -- because she has a special expertise with AAP and previously served on the AAP advisory committee.

^ did your DC get into AAP?

Got FSIQ 126 with Dr. Dahlgren but still thought she was great (interaction with child, explanation of scores, written report). I doubt that anyone has enough data to back up a claim that one tester provides higher scores than others. We chose Dr. Dahlgren -- and later recommended her to others, including on this board -- because she has a special expertise with AAP and previously served on the AAP advisory committee.