The majority of AAP class kids are bright kids (various level and area). I would say only 2-3 in each AAP class are genius level, and it is very easy to tell who they are when you attend their events. Bright kids will survive AAP curriculum just fine.

Kids like Jeremy Schumer who was doing calculus at age 6 and went to college at 12 (Ivy League)- those are the geniuses. AAP stands for advanced. Big difference.

DS 3rd grade AAP teacher said she estimated 10% of the class was truly gifted -- she hated my kid, he was the biggest behavior problem in there, but she said he was in that group due to depth of answers, original thinking during class discussions etc.

Completing assignments quickly and on time, listening politely and following directions alone does not equal AAP standards.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The generally accepted definition of "gifted" is 2 standard deviations above the norm. That would be ~2.5% of the population.

Assuming Fairfax draws gifted people who (maybe, if you think intelligence is genetic) have gifted kids, maybe you could up that to 3-4%.

Your child is bright, not gifted. THAT'S A GOOD THING. The world, society, life are made for people who are bright, not gifted.

This. But keep in mind that AAP includes 15-20% of the population. Most of the kids who are accepted into AAP are bright but not gifted.

And honestly success in AAP is about being either smart enough to not have to work hard in advanced math or a hard enough worker to keep up. Bright and hard working will be just fine in AAP (shoot, it can also succeed at TJ - that's me and I did!).

Or bright and not hard-working. What does success mean anyway? It's grade school, there are no As or Bs or Cs, it's all 3s and 4s and 2s. I have one DC who had a WISC of 145 who breezed through AAP in grade school and one with a WISC of 120 who does the bare minimum, or less, and still gets 3s.

Not really sure what measurement you are using for "success" in AAP. Number one in a kahoot? Getting a check on an assignment?

The one getting the 3's is part of the group that limits the number of extensions that the kids who are getting 4's could have access to, that is why people are annoyed that they are allowed in the class. The 3's mean that the Teacher is going to be spending time makign sure that the kids getting 3's understand the material well enough to move on to other areas. If your kid isn't doing the work and is getting 3's, they are slowing down the class. Especially since it is not exactly hard to get 3's in most ES. If you are of average intelligence and pay attention in class, you are likely to get a 3.

PP. We are at a traditional center school that doesn't slow down. There's no limiting of extensions here, parents complain of their kids getting left behind rather than the class slowing down.

But that's an interesting perspective of "3". Every teacher and every parent seems to view it differently, IME.

My kid who was the one complaining about not getting extensions got 3s some years. It's so teacher defined as to be meaningless.

But because of that kid I also know the kids the other PP was complaining about - the ones who were taking up all the math resource teacher's time bringing them up to speed in a small group so that same math resource teacher didn't have time to help develop an extension for the 2 or 3 kids who has already figured out the unit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The generally accepted definition of "gifted" is 2 standard deviations above the norm. That would be ~2.5% of the population.

Assuming Fairfax draws gifted people who (maybe, if you think intelligence is genetic) have gifted kids, maybe you could up that to 3-4%.

Your child is bright, not gifted. THAT'S A GOOD THING. The world, society, life are made for people who are bright, not gifted.

This. But keep in mind that AAP includes 15-20% of the population. Most of the kids who are accepted into AAP are bright but not gifted.

And honestly success in AAP is about being either smart enough to not have to work hard in advanced math or a hard enough worker to keep up. Bright and hard working will be just fine in AAP (shoot, it can also succeed at TJ - that's me and I did!).

Or bright and not hard-working. What does success mean anyway? It's grade school, there are no As or Bs or Cs, it's all 3s and 4s and 2s. I have one DC who had a WISC of 145 who breezed through AAP in grade school and one with a WISC of 120 who does the bare minimum, or less, and still gets 3s.

Not really sure what measurement you are using for "success" in AAP. Number one in a kahoot? Getting a check on an assignment?

The one getting the 3's is part of the group that limits the number of extensions that the kids who are getting 4's could have access to, that is why people are annoyed that they are allowed in the class. The 3's mean that the Teacher is going to be spending time makign sure that the kids getting 3's understand the material well enough to move on to other areas. If your kid isn't doing the work and is getting 3's, they are slowing down the class. Especially since it is not exactly hard to get 3's in most ES. If you are of average intelligence and pay attention in class, you are likely to get a 3.

PP. We are at a traditional center school that doesn't slow down. There's no limiting of extensions here, parents complain of their kids getting left behind rather than the class slowing down.

But that's an interesting perspective of "3". Every teacher and every parent seems to view it differently, IME.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The generally accepted definition of "gifted" is 2 standard deviations above the norm. That would be ~2.5% of the population.

Assuming Fairfax draws gifted people who (maybe, if you think intelligence is genetic) have gifted kids, maybe you could up that to 3-4%.

Your child is bright, not gifted. THAT'S A GOOD THING. The world, society, life are made for people who are bright, not gifted.

This. But keep in mind that AAP includes 15-20% of the population. Most of the kids who are accepted into AAP are bright but not gifted.

And honestly success in AAP is about being either smart enough to not have to work hard in advanced math or a hard enough worker to keep up. Bright and hard working will be just fine in AAP (shoot, it can also succeed at TJ - that's me and I did!).

Or bright and not hard-working. What does success mean anyway? It's grade school, there are no As or Bs or Cs, it's all 3s and 4s and 2s. I have one DC who had a WISC of 145 who breezed through AAP in grade school and one with a WISC of 120 who does the bare minimum, or less, and still gets 3s.

Not really sure what measurement you are using for "success" in AAP. Number one in a kahoot? Getting a check on an assignment?

The one getting the 3's is part of the group that limits the number of extensions that the kids who are getting 4's could have access to, that is why people are annoyed that they are allowed in the class. The 3's mean that the Teacher is going to be spending time makign sure that the kids getting 3's understand the material well enough to move on to other areas. If your kid isn't doing the work and is getting 3's, they are slowing down the class. Especially since it is not exactly hard to get 3's in most ES. If you are of average intelligence and pay attention in class, you are likely to get a 3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The generally accepted definition of "gifted" is 2 standard deviations above the norm. That would be ~2.5% of the population.

Assuming Fairfax draws gifted people who (maybe, if you think intelligence is genetic) have gifted kids, maybe you could up that to 3-4%.

Your child is bright, not gifted. THAT'S A GOOD THING. The world, society, life are made for people who are bright, not gifted.

This. But keep in mind that AAP includes 15-20% of the population. Most of the kids who are accepted into AAP are bright but not gifted.

And honestly success in AAP is about being either smart enough to not have to work hard in advanced math or a hard enough worker to keep up. Bright and hard working will be just fine in AAP (shoot, it can also succeed at TJ - that's me and I did!).

Or bright and not hard-working. What does success mean anyway? It's grade school, there are no As or Bs or Cs, it's all 3s and 4s and 2s. I have one DC who had a WISC of 145 who breezed through AAP in grade school and one with a WISC of 120 who does the bare minimum, or less, and still gets 3s.

Not really sure what measurement you are using for "success" in AAP. Number one in a kahoot? Getting a check on an assignment?

PP here. My measure of success is "learning the material enough to continue learning the material at the next grade."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our teacher spent 25 minutes telling us how our daughter is very bright but she’s not gifted. She gave examples that I don’t think were a proper interpretation of gifted vs just a bright child. It was pretty upsetting. We clearly have a different impression vs the classroom teacher and yes maybe biased but we definitely know our DD better than the teacher. Nnat 99% cogat I believe was 134. Iready reading 99% iready math 89%. In pool but did not get it but I did appeal.

I thought part of AAP was the potential for high achievement. I’m disappointed in the teachers impression. Are all kids truly geniuses?

Go get an IQ test for your daughter and include the result in the appeal package.

Or work on her math skills.

It appears that she tool the iReady seriously. The iReady's main flaw is that kids rush through it and the scores are not accurate. For kids who don't rush through it and make their best effort, the iReady helps identify gaps that need to be looked at and where kids are ahead. Kids scoring in the high 90th percentile are kids who are ahead in math. They are the ones who get enough grade level questions correct that they start to get the next grade level questions. The more of those that they get correct, the higher the score. A kid in the 99th percentile is showing that they understand concepts several grade levels above their current grade. That is a kid that belongs in Advanced Math, according tot he test.

An 89th percentile in math is a kid who is understanding grade level math and is maybe a bit ahead but not really advanced in math. There is nothing wrong with that. Is the OP seeing her daughter loving math and farther ahead then what the test says or the Teacher is seeing? If so, include that in the appeal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The generally accepted definition of "gifted" is 2 standard deviations above the norm. That would be ~2.5% of the population.

Assuming Fairfax draws gifted people who (maybe, if you think intelligence is genetic) have gifted kids, maybe you could up that to 3-4%.

Your child is bright, not gifted. THAT'S A GOOD THING. The world, society, life are made for people who are bright, not gifted.

This. But keep in mind that AAP includes 15-20% of the population. Most of the kids who are accepted into AAP are bright but not gifted.

And honestly success in AAP is about being either smart enough to not have to work hard in advanced math or a hard enough worker to keep up. Bright and hard working will be just fine in AAP (shoot, it can also succeed at TJ - that's me and I did!).

Or bright and not hard-working. What does success mean anyway? It's grade school, there are no As or Bs or Cs, it's all 3s and 4s and 2s. I have one DC who had a WISC of 145 who breezed through AAP in grade school and one with a WISC of 120 who does the bare minimum, or less, and still gets 3s.

Not really sure what measurement you are using for "success" in AAP. Number one in a kahoot? Getting a check on an assignment?

Anonymous wrote:Our teacher spent 25 minutes telling us how our daughter is very bright but she’s not gifted. She gave examples that I don’t think were a proper interpretation of gifted vs just a bright child. It was pretty upsetting. We clearly have a different impression vs the classroom teacher and yes maybe biased but we definitely know our DD better than the teacher. Nnat 99% cogat I believe was 134. Iready reading 99% iready math 89%. In pool but did not get it but I did appeal.

I thought part of AAP was the potential for high achievement. I’m disappointed in the teachers impression. Are all kids truly geniuses?

Go get an IQ test for your daughter and include the result in the appeal package.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The generally accepted definition of "gifted" is 2 standard deviations above the norm. That would be ~2.5% of the population.

Assuming Fairfax draws gifted people who (maybe, if you think intelligence is genetic) have gifted kids, maybe you could up that to 3-4%.

Your child is bright, not gifted. THAT'S A GOOD THING. The world, society, life are made for people who are bright, not gifted.

This. But keep in mind that AAP includes 15-20% of the population. Most of the kids who are accepted into AAP are bright but not gifted.

And honestly success in AAP is about being either smart enough to not have to work hard in advanced math or a hard enough worker to keep up. Bright and hard working will be just fine in AAP (shoot, it can also succeed at TJ - that's me and I did!).

Anonymous wrote:The generally accepted definition of "gifted" is 2 standard deviations above the norm. That would be ~2.5% of the population.

Assuming Fairfax draws gifted people who (maybe, if you think intelligence is genetic) have gifted kids, maybe you could up that to 3-4%.

Your child is bright, not gifted. THAT'S A GOOD THING. The world, society, life are made for people who are bright, not gifted.

This. But keep in mind that AAP includes 15-20% of the population. Most of the kids who are accepted into AAP are bright but not gifted.

Anonymous wrote:iReady is a joke. My kid scored 98 percent in the fall and then something like 30 percent in the spring. She just wanted to get to the brain break, she said. IE video game that she and her friends had been talking about before the test. Kids at that age should take tests with pencil and paper.

I don't disagree, the iReady is not a great test and many kids blow it off. OP's kids scores indicate that the kid didn't blow it off. Teachers have a good idea when to ignore the iReady scores, like a kid getting a 99th percentile and then a 30th percentile. They can look at how long it took the kid to complete the test to understand what happened.

And yes, kids with lower iReady percentiles are placed in AAP, just like kids with lower CoGAT and NNAT scores are placed in AAP. I would guess that the average scores are in the 95th percentile across AAP, with the 99th percentile balancing out the occasional 89th percentile.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me clarify the 89% math was iready math in early September. I don’t have any other math score but I assume it has gone up.

I’m not questioning if he’s gifted or just bright, I thought most aap are bright and not truly gifted….

Most kids in AAP are scoring in the 99th percentile in one iReady and probably 95th or higher percentile in the second. DS was 99th percentile for both iReadys and Passed Advanced for all of his SOLs, including 600s two out of four years in reading and math and a 600 on the science SOL. He is not a genius, but he is really smart.

The 89th percentile in Math is strong but not high enough for AAP at most schools.

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

My first was a 99th percentile kid, all the time.

My second was a low-90th percentile kid.

My third was like 88th percentile.

All 3 were admitted to AAP.

Very tired of the "if your kid is merely bright they don't belong in AAP" tropes. People - it's not that special. It's 20% of the county.

This. The top 20% of the country is not all geniuses. Not even close.

iReady is a joke. My kid scored 98 percent in the fall and then something like 30 percent in the spring. She just wanted to get to the brain break, she said. IE video game that she and her friends had been talking about before the test. Kids at that age should take tests with pencil and paper.