Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe my child is on the borderline:

Cogat:150
NNAT：127
iReady Math: 90
iReady Reading: 85
Hope: 1 Always / 7 Almost Always / 3 Often

Note - She is a summer born so is naturally one of the youngest in the class.

What should we focus on in our appeal?

COGAT looks prepped based on the other scores. Emphasize the reading/writing areas, since that one is lower, but likely still need to cover math as well - this might depend on the sub-scores in COGAT. Focus on why your child needs services. My package was geared towards how my child thrives on competition, and needed appropriate role models in class at his/her level. Give some examples of where they excelled in a higher level environment, or how they struggled without that environment. Don't say they're bored.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

This is what bothers me about the whole "holistic process" It favors families that are "in the know" about how the process works. You are intentionally giving an advantage to the children of parents that are familiar with the process.

Every parent has access to the AART and above is what would be told. It’s not being in the know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

Since no-one else has said it - Thank you for the update - Congratulations to your daughter! Super glad it worked out for you all - It sounds like that's where she needs to be!

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

Anonymous wrote:
How long were your samples when submitted? 1 page for each sample and 1 page for parent statement so 5 pages total or did you do something else? What are page limits for appeals. Thanks,

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

This is what bothers me about the whole "holistic process" It favors families that are "in the know" about how the process works. You are intentionally giving an advantage to the children of parents that are familiar with the process.

Anonymous wrote:Replying to this thread in case it helps future parents. Thanks for all the great info here!

Our daughter got in on appeal. Here are a few tips

- Work with your AART - ours was very helpful and gave us guidance along the way.

- Focus on what needs most attention. Since ours had pretty decent scores, we did NOT do any further testing and instead concentrated exclusively on samples and the parent letter.

- Speaking of samples - here is what we did:

* A short story (with illustration) around a topic she was interested in

* Another short story (don't quite recall the origin of it)

* A math problem (prompt generated by Chat GPT)

* A picture of a board game she did

--- For all the samples, except the board game photo, we wrote a few sentences explaining our thoughts behind it. For the board game, our child wrote about it.

We were involved with the samples of course but not overly so (ie, some spelling mistakes were present). But we made sure that it was neat and in good handwriting (as good as a 7 year old can do).

The samples took time so plan accordingly. Each sample from beginning to end was probably 1-2 hours in terms of planning, discussing, doing a rough draft, a final copy, etc. Aim for 5-6 samples (split between math & non-math) so you can (along with the input of your AART) choose the best ones.

Anonymous wrote:I believe my child is on the borderline:

Cogat:150
NNAT：127
iReady Math: 90
iReady Reading: 85
Hope: 1 Always / 7 Almost Always / 3 Often

Note - She is a summer born so is naturally one of the youngest in the class.

What should we focus on in our appeal?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am curious why you would push her into a program for which she's not qualified to participate? Why not err on the other side of the border?

NP. Why would you view her as unqualified? The CogAT scores are off the charts and well above the 99.9th percentile threshold. The HOPE rating is quite strong. While the iready scores are not great, there are a lot of kids with lower scores getting admitted. OP's kid should have been a shoo-in and not borderline, based on the CogAT and HOPE.

The person who thinks that the CogAT looks prepped is a moron. It would not be possible to prep a kid to a 150 CogAT, unless the kid would have scored in the 99th percentile without prep. Also, prepped kids are much more likely to be in math and reading enrichment programs, and thus have high iready scores, but lower HOPE ratings.

OP, either the work samples were bad/sloppy, the iready scores gave the panel some concern, or your child was a victim of the randomness of the system. The same approach should cover all three. Write a parent letter emphasizing your kid's gifted traits, showing that your child is academically advanced in both language arts and reading, and explaining why your child needs the extra challenge of AAP. Include work samples that show advanced abilities in both math and language arts. Put an explanation of the gifted trait being shown by the sample either in a box on the sample itself, or reference it in your cover letter.

A kid with a 150 CogAT and reasonably strong support from the teacher obviously belongs in AAP.

Disagree. 150 COGAT should be tied with 99% on iready, and a much higher NNAT; these arent all independant elements - If a child is that bright, it manifests itself across the board. Of everything presented, the COGAT is the outlier. There is a HUUUUGE difference between 99% (136 COGAT) and their score of 150. If they presented the same information with a COGAT of 136, which is likely the unprepped score of the child, then we'd all be in agreement that the child is likely a high-borderline candidate, even then though, the low 90's iready are odd without an explanation (sick, back from travel, ??)

I did notice we basically arrived at the same solution. Appeal, emphasize needing challenges, and show work samples in language arts (potentially math).

The elements actually are somewhat independent. CogAT is an aptitude test and should measure intrinsic ability. iready is an achievement test and measures level of academic advancement. They're not the same, and there are many reasons why a kid might be much higher on the one than the other. A kid who has higher intrinsic ability but lower achievement would fit the profile of a kid who has not received much outside or home enrichment, has an undiagnosed LD (ADHD, dyslexia, etc.), or who rushed through the iready.

Also, the OP's HOPE score is a pretty strong endorsement. If the kid has a 99th percentile CogAT (even if it's a 'mere' 136) and has relatively strong teacher support, I wouldn't view the kid as borderline.

Agree with this:"A kid who has higher intrinsic ability but lower achievement would fit the profile of a kid who has not received much outside or home enrichment, has an undiagnosed LD (ADHD, dyslexia, etc.), or who rushed through the iready. "

But unfortunately, FCPS seems viewing it differently, high CogAT, lower iReady, the student must have prepped for CogAT.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am curious why you would push her into a program for which she's not qualified to participate? Why not err on the other side of the border?

NP. Why would you view her as unqualified? The CogAT scores are off the charts and well above the 99.9th percentile threshold. The HOPE rating is quite strong. While the iready scores are not great, there are a lot of kids with lower scores getting admitted. OP's kid should have been a shoo-in and not borderline, based on the CogAT and HOPE.

The person who thinks that the CogAT looks prepped is a moron. It would not be possible to prep a kid to a 150 CogAT, unless the kid would have scored in the 99th percentile without prep. Also, prepped kids are much more likely to be in math and reading enrichment programs, and thus have high iready scores, but lower HOPE ratings.

OP, either the work samples were bad/sloppy, the iready scores gave the panel some concern, or your child was a victim of the randomness of the system. The same approach should cover all three. Write a parent letter emphasizing your kid's gifted traits, showing that your child is academically advanced in both language arts and reading, and explaining why your child needs the extra challenge of AAP. Include work samples that show advanced abilities in both math and language arts. Put an explanation of the gifted trait being shown by the sample either in a box on the sample itself, or reference it in your cover letter.

A kid with a 150 CogAT and reasonably strong support from the teacher obviously belongs in AAP.

Disagree. 150 COGAT should be tied with 99% on iready, and a much higher NNAT; these arent all independant elements - If a child is that bright, it manifests itself across the board. Of everything presented, the COGAT is the outlier. There is a HUUUUGE difference between 99% (136 COGAT) and their score of 150. If they presented the same information with a COGAT of 136, which is likely the unprepped score of the child, then we'd all be in agreement that the child is likely a high-borderline candidate, even then though, the low 90's iready are odd without an explanation (sick, back from travel, ??)

I did notice we basically arrived at the same solution. Appeal, emphasize needing challenges, and show work samples in language arts (potentially math).

The elements actually are somewhat independent. CogAT is an aptitude test and should measure intrinsic ability. iready is an achievement test and measures level of academic advancement. They're not the same, and there are many reasons why a kid might be much higher on the one than the other. A kid who has higher intrinsic ability but lower achievement would fit the profile of a kid who has not received much outside or home enrichment, has an undiagnosed LD (ADHD, dyslexia, etc.), or who rushed through the iready.

Also, the OP's HOPE score is a pretty strong endorsement. If the kid has a 99th percentile CogAT (even if it's a 'mere' 136) and has relatively strong teacher support, I wouldn't view the kid as borderline.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am curious why you would push her into a program for which she's not qualified to participate? Why not err on the other side of the border?

NP. Why would you view her as unqualified? The CogAT scores are off the charts and well above the 99.9th percentile threshold. The HOPE rating is quite strong. While the iready scores are not great, there are a lot of kids with lower scores getting admitted. OP's kid should have been a shoo-in and not borderline, based on the CogAT and HOPE.

The person who thinks that the CogAT looks prepped is a moron. It would not be possible to prep a kid to a 150 CogAT, unless the kid would have scored in the 99th percentile without prep. Also, prepped kids are much more likely to be in math and reading enrichment programs, and thus have high iready scores, but lower HOPE ratings.

OP, either the work samples were bad/sloppy, the iready scores gave the panel some concern, or your child was a victim of the randomness of the system. The same approach should cover all three. Write a parent letter emphasizing your kid's gifted traits, showing that your child is academically advanced in both language arts and reading, and explaining why your child needs the extra challenge of AAP. Include work samples that show advanced abilities in both math and language arts. Put an explanation of the gifted trait being shown by the sample either in a box on the sample itself, or reference it in your cover letter.

A kid with a 150 CogAT and reasonably strong support from the teacher obviously belongs in AAP.

Disagree. 150 COGAT should be tied with 99% on iready, and a much higher NNAT; these arent all independant elements - If a child is that bright, it manifests itself across the board. Of everything presented, the COGAT is the outlier. There is a HUUUUGE difference between 99% (136 COGAT) and their score of 150. If they presented the same information with a COGAT of 136, which is likely the unprepped score of the child, then we'd all be in agreement that the child is likely a high-borderline candidate, even then though, the low 90's iready are odd without an explanation (sick, back from travel, ??)

I did notice we basically arrived at the same solution. Appeal, emphasize needing challenges, and show work samples in language arts (potentially math).

The elements actually are somewhat independent. CogAT is an aptitude test and should measure intrinsic ability. iready is an achievement test and measures level of academic advancement. They're not the same, and there are many reasons why a kid might be much higher on the one than the other. A kid who has higher intrinsic ability but lower achievement would fit the profile of a kid who has not received much outside or home enrichment, has an undiagnosed LD (ADHD, dyslexia, etc.), or who rushed through the iready.

Also, the OP's HOPE score is a pretty strong endorsement. If the kid has a 99th percentile CogAT (even if it's a 'mere' 136) and has relatively strong teacher support, I wouldn't view the kid as borderline.