No, my child had 132 and did not get in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

+1 our high SES center school is over 140+ for in-pool. An in-pool score means a packet is automatically created by the school w/o parent referral, it does not mean the child is guaranteed AAP placement.

DP. That's embarrassing. Those kids do not all have an IQ over 140, they are all/nearly all prepped to get those scores. Absurd.

Glad we chose to buy our house in a non-TJ-mania area (from the old map).

Yeah, they are stealing tests paying IQ examiners who they know will "play ball”, and whatever else they can come up with in order for their kid to get a leg up.

TROLL ALERT:

PP is falsely alleging all test-prep services are “stealing tests.” That is a lie. There are no thefts or anything like it.

Test prep companies ask and sometimes get, old outdated tests from The College Board or other companies. That is not “stealing.”

When they are unable to buy past tests, prep companies sometimes do survey students about PAST tests, then they attempt to partly recreate those standardized tests, with variable accuracy. This also is not stealing.

When people have called out this troll in other threads, she tries to argue this amounts to “stealing.” The PP is a crazy troll; ignore her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

+1 our high SES center school is over 140+ for in-pool. An in-pool score means a packet is automatically created by the school w/o parent referral, it does not mean the child is guaranteed AAP placement.

DP. That's embarrassing. Those kids do not all have an IQ over 140, they are all/nearly all prepped to get those scores. Absurd.

Glad we chose to buy our house in a non-TJ-mania area (from the old map).

Yeah, they are stealing tests paying IQ examiners who they know will "play ball”, and whatever else they can come up with in order for their kid to get a leg up.

No, that’s not typically done, despite you trolling every thread claiming it is so. Prepping, however, is rampant.

Prepping may be rampant but it's not really that effective unless you equate learning to prepping.
You call it prep if thgat makes you feel better about the results we are seeing, but aside from taking a practice test or two, it's all just learning.
The best ways to "prep" for the NNAT and COGAT is to have an enriched environment and encourage a lot of reading.
Then do a practice test just so your kid is familiar with the timing and the test format and you're pretty much done. Everything else is mostly pushing a rope.

Prepping, to me, is teaching to a specific test and only that test. So prepping for CoGAT or the NNAT is using study material to teach your child how to do well on that test.

Enrichment is something that most parents in this thread probably participate in. We read to our kids, we plays games that use math with our kids, we take them to museums. Some people enroll their kids in academic programs, like AoPS or RSM. Kids participate in clubs like robotics, chess, coding, or the like. The program is geared towards engaging kids in activities that strengthen academic skills and broaden a kids knowledge base.

Enrichment will improve CoGAT, NNAT, iReady scores and classroom performance but it is not geared at just doing well on one test. Parents are looking for the overall academic engagement and expansion and hoping for improvement on tests that will impact their future.

I understand prepping for SATs and ACTs and things that will improve your success in applying for colleges. I don't understand prepping for tests to get into programs in K and ES, mainly because it feels like you are adding pressure to a 4-11 year olds life who probably doesn't need that type of pressure in their life. But that is me.

If you think that kids are prepping for more than a a few hours for a particular test then you misunderstand what's going on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

+1 our high SES center school is over 140+ for in-pool. An in-pool score means a packet is automatically created by the school w/o parent referral, it does not mean the child is guaranteed AAP placement.

DP. That's embarrassing. Those kids do not all have an IQ over 140, they are all/nearly all prepped to get those scores. Absurd.

Glad we chose to buy our house in a non-TJ-mania area (from the old map).

Yeah, they are stealing tests paying IQ examiners who they know will "play ball”, and whatever else they can come up with in order for their kid to get a leg up.

No, that’s not typically done, despite you trolling every thread claiming it is so. Prepping, however, is rampant.

Prepping may be rampant but it's not really that effective unless you equate learning to prepping.
You call it prep if thgat makes you feel better about the results we are seeing, but aside from taking a practice test or two, it's all just learning.
The best ways to "prep" for the NNAT and COGAT is to have an enriched environment and encourage a lot of reading.
Then do a practice test just so your kid is familiar with the timing and the test format and you're pretty much done. Everything else is mostly pushing a rope.

Prepping, to me, is teaching to a specific test and only that test. So prepping for CoGAT or the NNAT is using study material to teach your child how to do well on that test.

Enrichment is something that most parents in this thread probably participate in. We read to our kids, we plays games that use math with our kids, we take them to museums. Some people enroll their kids in academic programs, like AoPS or RSM. Kids participate in clubs like robotics, chess, coding, or the like. The program is geared towards engaging kids in activities that strengthen academic skills and broaden a kids knowledge base.

Enrichment will improve CoGAT, NNAT, iReady scores and classroom performance but it is not geared at just doing well on one test. Parents are looking for the overall academic engagement and expansion and hoping for improvement on tests that will impact their future.

I understand prepping for SATs and ACTs and things that will improve your success in applying for colleges. I don't understand prepping for tests to get into programs in K and ES, mainly because it feels like you are adding pressure to a 4-11 year olds life who probably doesn't need that type of pressure in their life. But that is me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

+1 our high SES center school is over 140+ for in-pool. An in-pool score means a packet is automatically created by the school w/o parent referral, it does not mean the child is guaranteed AAP placement.

DP. That's embarrassing. Those kids do not all have an IQ over 140, they are all/nearly all prepped to get those scores. Absurd.

Glad we chose to buy our house in a non-TJ-mania area (from the old map).

Yeah, they are stealing tests paying IQ examiners who they know will "play ball”, and whatever else they can come up with in order for their kid to get a leg up.

No, that’s not typically done, despite you trolling every thread claiming it is so. Prepping, however, is rampant.

Prepping may be rampant but it's not really that effective unless you equate learning to prepping.
You call it prep if thgat makes you feel better about the results we are seeing, but aside from taking a practice test or two, it's all just learning.
The best ways to "prep" for the NNAT and COGAT is to have an enriched environment and encourage a lot of reading.
Then do a practice test just so your kid is familiar with the timing and the test format and you're pretty much done. Everything else is mostly pushing a rope.

+1 except I'd say logic games are also good for both and just for learning in general.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

+1 our high SES center school is over 140+ for in-pool. An in-pool score means a packet is automatically created by the school w/o parent referral, it does not mean the child is guaranteed AAP placement.

DP. That's embarrassing. Those kids do not all have an IQ over 140, they are all/nearly all prepped to get those scores. Absurd.

Glad we chose to buy our house in a non-TJ-mania area (from the old map).

Yeah, they are stealing tests paying IQ examiners who they know will "play ball”, and whatever else they can come up with in order for their kid to get a leg up.

No, that’s not typically done, despite you trolling every thread claiming it is so. Prepping, however, is rampant.

Prepping may be rampant but it's not really that effective unless you equate learning to prepping.
You call it prep if thgat makes you feel better about the results we are seeing, but aside from taking a practice test or two, it's all just learning.
The best ways to "prep" for the NNAT and COGAT is to have an enriched environment and encourage a lot of reading.
Then do a practice test just so your kid is familiar with the timing and the test format and you're pretty much done. Everything else is mostly pushing a rope.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

It's incredibly unfair. We switched schools - at our old school, DD would have definitely gotten in to AAP, but at the new school, she was not even in pool.

Of my 3 kids who got into AAP, only one was in-pool. This board can teach you how to write excellent answers to the parent questionnaire, produce compelling work samples, and the like. As long as your kid is decently smart you have every tool you need as a parent to ensure your kid gets in. Really.

Completely depends on your school w/ new local norms. When did your 3 kids get in bc things have changed a lot in the last 3 years.

I have two kids in AAP - 1 in-pool when 132 was countywide pool cutoff and 1 was not in-pool b/c local norms were adopted and in-pool score was over 145. The process used to be more predictable but is now a total crapshoot. Sure, I could pat myself on the back for putting together an excellent packet, but realistically I know a large part was luck.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

It's incredibly unfair. We switched schools - at our old school, DD would have definitely gotten in to AAP, but at the new school, she was not even in pool.

Of my 3 kids who got into AAP, only one was in-pool. This board can teach you how to write excellent answers to the parent questionnaire, produce compelling work samples, and the like. As long as your kid is decently smart you have every tool you need as a parent to ensure your kid gets in. Really.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

+1 our high SES center school is over 140+ for in-pool. An in-pool score means a packet is automatically created by the school w/o parent referral, it does not mean the child is guaranteed AAP placement.

DP. That's embarrassing. Those kids do not all have an IQ over 140, they are all/nearly all prepped to get those scores. Absurd.

Glad we chose to buy our house in a non-TJ-mania area (from the old map).

CogAT and NNAT are not IQ tests.
-mid TJ mania parent

They are pretty close. These tests are pretty g-loaded but it's not a WISC

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

It's incredibly unfair. We switched schools - at our old school, DD would have definitely gotten in to AAP, but at the new school, she was not even in pool.

What is unfair about that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

It's incredibly unfair. We switched schools - at our old school, DD would have definitely gotten in to AAP, but at the new school, she was not even in pool.

OP, they will tell you the score is too low. Then ask them, "if that score is too low, can you assure me that no other student will be admitted with a lower score?"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

+1 our high SES center school is over 140+ for in-pool. An in-pool score means a packet is automatically created by the school w/o parent referral, it does not mean the child is guaranteed AAP placement.

DP. That's embarrassing. Those kids do not all have an IQ over 140, they are all/nearly all prepped to get those scores. Absurd.

Glad we chose to buy our house in a non-TJ-mania area (from the old map).

Yeah, they are stealing tests paying IQ examiners who they know will "play ball”, and whatever else they can come up with in order for their kid to get a leg up.

No, that’s not typically done, despite you trolling every thread claiming it is so. Prepping, however, is rampant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

+1 our high SES center school is over 140+ for in-pool. An in-pool score means a packet is automatically created by the school w/o parent referral, it does not mean the child is guaranteed AAP placement.

DP. That's embarrassing. Those kids do not all have an IQ over 140, they are all/nearly all prepped to get those scores. Absurd.

Glad we chose to buy our house in a non-TJ-mania area (from the old map).

Yeah, they are stealing tests paying IQ examiners who they know will "play ball”, and whatever else they can come up with in order for their kid to get a leg up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard cut off is 132

There is no cut off. 132 used to the in-pool cutoff for the County. Now each school has it’s own in-pool cutoff, although Center schools might still use the 132.

They don't use 132, or at least ours didnt. 136/136 NNAT/COGAT not in pool last year.

Our center doesn't use 132 either. It's 10% of the school, any school, for 2nd grade. At a high SES/high acheiving ES, especially with a smaller 2nd grade cohort, the cut score might be very high.

It's also an average of NNAT and CogAT.

None of that applies for applications that aren't for fall of 3rd grade, though.

+1 our high SES center school is over 140+ for in-pool. An in-pool score means a packet is automatically created by the school w/o parent referral, it does not mean the child is guaranteed AAP placement.

DP. That's embarrassing. Those kids do not all have an IQ over 140, they are all/nearly all prepped to get those scores. Absurd.

Glad we chose to buy our house in a non-TJ-mania area (from the old map).

CogAT and NNAT are not IQ tests but there is absolutely widespread prepping at our school and most other high SES schools for those tests. I agree that it’s absurd and it has also rendered scores meaningless. Prepper parents are part of the reason why the county moved to a more holistic approach and they only have themselves to blame for the importance that has now been placed on HOPE rating.