Anonymous wrote:+1. Thank you for the info. The percentiles are by all 2nd graders, not by age groups. I hope they realize that it's unfair for younger kids. DD got 10+ higher score in NNAT even she missed one more question than an older kid. Age is game changer in raw score and score norm by age.

I could not agree more. My dc is a July birthday, and managed 95% composite and in one other category. However, if it were age adjusted, the score would be higher, as there are kids a year older in his class. I see others here saying it does not matter, as the purpose of the tests was only to determine the pool. Aren't the scores evaluated as a final selection criteria among all applicants from the pool or who were referred in?

Also, I am curious as to how many kids who score into the pool are ultimately not admitted. If a composite score on the CoGat is greater than 95%, that puts the kid in the top 5% of Fairfax County class, and the top 12-16% supposedly are ultimately center eligible. Are low GIBR scores disqualifying a significant number of kids who test into the pool? Of course this data is probably under lock and key.

Anonymous wrote:


Have you ever been in an AAP center classroom?
I have two kids in the center and its really like an ADD festival in there. Highly gifted kids often come with a lot of issues.

I have, and that's my point--I don't see a lot of highly gifted kids there. I see a lot of bright, hard-working kids whose behavior was an asset to the gen ed classroom (but who are not such intellectual giants that they couldn't cope in gen ed). Perhaps this changes by center and/or specific year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think their goal is a lower population. Hence the new testing format. The number of kids in AAP has gotten out of control and is negatively impacting genEd classes.

I have heard this argument before-how exactly is GenEd being disadvantaged? The AAP students bring in more money and resources for the school-why is that a disadvantage?

Can you explain this please?

I don't understand the money connection, either, except perhaps for schools that are AAP centers.

In terms of how general ed is impacted, I see AAP as less a "brain drain" than a "behavior drain" on gen ed classrooms. I've opined before that I see relatively few gifted children in the centers but many bright, conscientious kids who follow directions and behave well in order to succeed. These kids are great motivators in the gen ed classroom and help us retain good teachers.

Have you ever been in an AAP center classroom?
I have two kids in the center and its really like an ADD festival in there. Highly gifted kids often come with a lot of issues.

+1. Thank you for the info. The percentiles are by all 2nd graders, not by age groups. I hope they realize that it's unfair for younger kids. DD got 10+ higher score in NNAT even she missed one more question than an older kid. Age is game changer in raw score and score norm by age.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think their goal is a lower population. Hence the new testing format. The number of kids in AAP has gotten out of control and is negatively impacting genEd classes.

I have heard this argument before-how exactly is GenEd being disadvantaged? The AAP students bring in more money and resources for the school-why is that a disadvantage?

Can you explain this please?

I don't understand the money connection, either, except perhaps for schools that are AAP centers.

In terms of how general ed is impacted, I see AAP as less a "brain drain" than a "behavior drain" on gen ed classrooms. I've opined before that I see relatively few gifted children in the centers but many bright, conscientious kids who follow directions and behave well in order to succeed. These kids are great motivators in the gen ed classroom and help us retain good teachers.

Anonymous wrote:No, the scores for this year's second grade CogAT are not adjusted by age. I am the poster who called the testing office and spoke with a specialist with in-depth knowledge of the test. I told him I would not post his name to DCUM, but the testing office phone number is (571) 423-1400 if anyone wishes to call and get the same info themselves.

They should have adjusted the scores by age. Otherwise how is it fair to younger kids? How can the screening committee compare kids scores for NNAT & WISC which are age adjusted to CogAT (which is not age adjusted)?

Just looked at an old CoGat score report from 2011-DC scored 99th percentile, which was a composite score of 136. Benchmark was set at 132 for the pool-I am guessing perhaps 132=95th percentile (at least for that year). If that is the case, perhaps 132 or thereabouts remains the composite score benchmark for the new test too but the county doesn't want that info out. We'll see how it shakes out in the fall with this year's second grade.

Interestingly, not any difference between age score and grade score (and DC is a fall bday).

That is true-you can end up with a higher composite score than the highest or average of the three subscores, so perhaps it does factor age into account somehow.

8:41--If they are looking at "developed abilities" there has to be some type of advantage for the majority of kids if a child is an Oct birthday vs. and August birthday.

I don't understand is if the composite score takes into consideration the age issue. My child's composite score was the same as the highest of her 3 subscores. One of her subscores was in the 80s but she still hit the 95%. Wondering if others had a similar breakdown.

I agree that children redshirted should be scored differently, but I don't think it's quite fair to judge the Oct-Dec kids as if they had some unfair advantage. They play by the cutoff rules and should be graded same as the April-May kids IMO.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seriously can't imagine FCPS having age-scored the CogAT. That's a very complicated process, actually. And, the letter specifically says it's compared to other 2nd-graders in Fairfax County that took the test. I believe the PP that said s/he spoke with someone in the testing office.

Then, what about the 3rd graders?
If CogAT score is not age-scored , it's a huge advantage to 3rd and upper graders.

BTW, the 3rd and upper graders took the CogAT and NNAT test again on the same day with 2nd graders?

Only 2nd graders used the new fairfax county CogAT. 3rd and up graders are still using regular CogAT.

Grades 3-6 did not take the same test as the second graders. They never have. It's always been the CogAt and Naglieri, but they are versions adjusted for those grade levels.

Anonymous wrote:I seriously can't imagine FCPS having age-scored the CogAT. That's a very complicated process, actually. And, the letter specifically says it's compared to other 2nd-graders in Fairfax County that took the test. I believe the PP that said s/he spoke with someone in the testing office.

Then, what about the 3rd graders?
If CogAT score is not age-scored , it's a huge advantage to 3rd and upper graders.

BTW, the 3rd and upper graders took the CogAT and NNAT test again on the same day with 2nd graders?

Anonymous wrote:I think their goal is a lower population. Hence the new testing format. The number of kids in AAP has gotten out of control and is negatively impacting genEd classes.

I have heard this argument before-how exactly is GenEd being disadvantaged? The AAP students bring in more money and resources for the school-why is that a disadvantage?

Can you explain this please?

I think their goal is a lower population. Hence the new testing format. The number of kids in AAP has gotten out of control and is negatively impacting genEd classes.

I have heard this argument before-how exactly is GenEd being disadvantaged? The AAP students bring in more money and resources for the school-why is that a disadvantage?