I feel bad for all the people who still haven't received scores. We got ours yesterday, but it's crazy that many people are still waiting when they promised them by the end of January which is three-and-a-half months after the test!

Anonymous wrote:Nothing here either. Call me agitated.

Do you want to get the letter in a backpack, where anyone can open it before you, if it even gets home or a parent doesn't look (I know, not the parents here) or do you want to get it through the mail, which after the school prepares the letters for the mail they go in the pony to a central location to be posted and then mailed? It's not always a quick turn around. Patience.....

Nothing here either. Call me agitated.

Same situation here.

I still have not received anything either

It is now January 31st. I have just checked the mail, and my DC's backpack and there are no scores. Anyone else still not receive scores?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS, now in AAP in grade 4 tested into the pool in both CogAT and NNAT, but did not get in initially due to low GBRS (10). We appealed with 98% on WISC. He is doing great in the program.

Do they place more emphasis on the WISC than the pool tests, a true IQ test? Isn't IQ the real standard in determining if a child is "gifted"? Seems compared to IQ a gifted level IQ a teacher's subjective evaluation is only noise.

Keep in mind it called Advanced Academic Program, not Gifted and Talented any more. I think the committee want to see how the kids perform (motivated, generate good works); not just high test score/high IQ. You can have kids with high IQ, but not being motivated, not producing good work, and probably not good candidates for AAP; being they might need extra push to produce good work even in the program.
I'm not saying the high WISC will not help, but the parents have to make the effort to get WISC and appeal, to make up their kids' "lack of effort".

These are the kids who need an advanced program the most, usually. I thought they changed the name after they diluted the qualifications for entry from truly GT to merely "advanced".

I had a kid in GT when they changed the name to AAP. At the meeting I attended that year, Carol Horn said that the name change was because people assumed that their child who was gifted in music or athletics should be included in the program, and they wanted to emphasize that it is a program for academic talent.

The notion that they intentionally changed the standards and the name to go along with it is false. It was just an unfortunate coincidence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS, now in AAP in grade 4 tested into the pool in both CogAT and NNAT, but did not get in initially due to low GBRS (10). We appealed with 98% on WISC. He is doing great in the program.

Do they place more emphasis on the WISC than the pool tests, a true IQ test? Isn't IQ the real standard in determining if a child is "gifted"? Seems compared to IQ a gifted level IQ a teacher's subjective evaluation is only noise.

Keep in mind it called Advanced Academic Program, not Gifted and Talented any more. I think the committee want to see how the kids perform (motivated, generate good works); not just high test score/high IQ. You can have kids with high IQ, but not being motivated, not producing good work, and probably not good candidates for AAP; being they might need extra push to produce good work even in the program.
I'm not saying the high WISC will not help, but the parents have to make the effort to get WISC and appeal, to make up their kids' "lack of effort".

These are the kids who need an advanced program the most, usually. I thought they changed the name after they diluted the qualifications for entry from truly GT to merely "advanced".

+1. Also, what good work does 2nd graders produce? The program needs high IQ kids.

+100

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS, now in AAP in grade 4 tested into the pool in both CogAT and NNAT, but did not get in initially due to low GBRS (10). We appealed with 98% on WISC. He is doing great in the program.

Do they place more emphasis on the WISC than the pool tests, a true IQ test? Isn't IQ the real standard in determining if a child is "gifted"? Seems compared to IQ a gifted level IQ a teacher's subjective evaluation is only noise.

Keep in mind it called Advanced Academic Program, not Gifted and Talented any more. I think the committee want to see how the kids perform (motivated, generate good works); not just high test score/high IQ. You can have kids with high IQ, but not being motivated, not producing good work, and probably not good candidates for AAP; being they might need extra push to produce good work even in the program.
I'm not saying the high WISC will not help, but the parents have to make the effort to get WISC and appeal, to make up their kids' "lack of effort".

These are the kids who need an advanced program the most, usually. I thought they changed the name after they diluted the qualifications for entry from truly GT to merely "advanced".

+1. Also, what good work does 2nd graders produce? The program needs high IQ kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS, now in AAP in grade 4 tested into the pool in both CogAT and NNAT, but did not get in initially due to low GBRS (10). We appealed with 98% on WISC. He is doing great in the program.

Do they place more emphasis on the WISC than the pool tests, a true IQ test? Isn't IQ the real standard in determining if a child is "gifted"? Seems compared to IQ a gifted level IQ a teacher's subjective evaluation is only noise.

Keep in mind it called Advanced Academic Program, not Gifted and Talented any more. I think the committee want to see how the kids perform (motivated, generate good works); not just high test score/high IQ. You can have kids with high IQ, but not being motivated, not producing good work, and probably not good candidates for AAP; being they might need extra push to produce good work even in the program.
I'm not saying the high WISC will not help, but the parents have to make the effort to get WISC and appeal, to make up their kids' "lack of effort".

These are the kids who need an advanced program the most, usually. I thought they changed the name after they diluted the qualifications for entry from truly GT to merely "advanced".

Anonymous wrote:My DS, now in AAP in grade 4 tested into the pool in both CogAT and NNAT, but did not get in initially due to low GBRS (10). We appealed with 98% on WISC. He is doing great in the program.

Do they place more emphasis on the WISC than the pool tests, a true IQ test? Isn't IQ the real standard in determining if a child is "gifted"? Seems compared to IQ a gifted level IQ a teacher's subjective evaluation is only noise.

Keep in mind it called Advanced Academic Program, not Gifted and Talented any more. I think the committee want to see how the kids perform (motivated, generate good works); not just high test score/high IQ. You can have kids with high IQ, but not being motivated, not producing good work, and probably not good candidates for AAP; being they might need extra push to produce good work even in the program.
I'm not saying the high WISC will not help, but the parents have to make the effort to get WISC and appeal, to make up their kids' "lack of effort".

A strong WISC (132 or above) does seem to help a candidate who might have just missed the pool and has a reasonable GBRS-at least, in the past.

My DS, now in AAP in grade 4 tested into the pool in both CogAT and NNAT, but did not get in initially due to low GBRS (10). We appealed with 98% on WISC. He is doing great in the program.

Do they place more emphasis on the WISC than the pool tests, a true IQ test? Isn't IQ the real standard in determining if a child is "gifted"? Seems compared to IQ a gifted level IQ a teacher's subjective evaluation is only noise.

Yes-a GBRS below 12 (for a pool candidate) makes one more iffy and below 10 usually not admitted first round though parents typically appeal those kids.

The idea is that the test can be prepped for (and let's face it, often is in these parts) and the committee wants to see the work samples and teacher commentary to support high test scores. It is not just one teacher that does the GBRS-usually the school AART, principal, and other second grade teachers all participate and a score is generated for EACH second grader, not just those in pool.

Anonymous wrote: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.

Recent years, with national 98% on NNAT or CogAT, about 19% kids in pool, and result in 16% center eligible.
With this new countywide 95% on CogAT, my guess is about 12-16% kids in pool, and might 9-12% center eligible.
Since the CogAT has much tighter standard, I would imaging most of the >95% CogAT kids will be center eligible (certainly there will be exceptions).