Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering that some parents delay their children's school entry by a year, it's difficult to believe that the HOPE assessment is entirely free of bias.

In general, the age distribution in AAP classes skews youngers than gen ed. For reasons that should be obvious.

Wait? Why?

Parents of bright kids tend not to hold them back, they send them on time.

There is redshirting in FCPS, maybe not as much as some other areas but definitely for the August September birthdays and for many of the summer months. In AAP, most of those birthdays are sent on time instead of redshirting.

This is interesting. I have a DC born on Sept. 30th, and we "held back" since the birthday was literally right on the cusp and DC is a shy and we wanted to give more time to build confidence in social skills in preschool. But DC is very bright, had strong NNAT and Cogat, good HOPE, good work samples and was rejected. I had a gut feeling that there was a grudge against a so-called "red-shirted" kid. Otherwise the rejection made no sense. DC is a model student, but I imagined the committee shrugging that off as an obvious conclusion for a "red-shirted" kid instead of giving DC credit.

I would say it is harder for redshirted kids to get into aap. It’s not because of a grudge but your kid is “smarter” because they are older. Their peers are a grade level ahead. And the aptitude in tests are normalized by age not grade.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering that some parents delay their children's school entry by a year, it's difficult to believe that the HOPE assessment is entirely free of bias.

In general, the age distribution in AAP classes skews youngers than gen ed. For reasons that should be obvious.

Wait? Why?

Parents of bright kids tend not to hold them back, they send them on time.

There is redshirting in FCPS, maybe not as much as some other areas but definitely for the August September birthdays and for many of the summer months. In AAP, most of those birthdays are sent on time instead of redshirting.

This is interesting. I have a DC born on Sept. 30th, and we "held back" since the birthday was literally right on the cusp and DC is a shy and we wanted to give more time to build confidence in social skills in preschool. But DC is very bright, had strong NNAT and Cogat, good HOPE, good work samples and was rejected. I had a gut feeling that there was a grudge against a so-called "red-shirted" kid. Otherwise the rejection made no sense. DC is a model student, but I imagined the committee shrugging that off as an obvious conclusion for a "red-shirted" kid instead of giving DC credit.

Uh no one is paying attention to the kid’s bday when they’re reviewing files. Did you appeal? It also depends on the school context. If you are in a high SES elementary, need higher scores likely.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering that some parents delay their children's school entry by a year, it's difficult to believe that the HOPE assessment is entirely free of bias.

In general, the age distribution in AAP classes skews youngers than gen ed. For reasons that should be obvious.

Wait? Why?

Parents of bright kids tend not to hold them back, they send them on time.

There is redshirting in FCPS, maybe not as much as some other areas but definitely for the August September birthdays and for many of the summer months. In AAP, most of those birthdays are sent on time instead of redshirting.

This is interesting. I have a DC born on Sept. 30th, and we "held back" since the birthday was literally right on the cusp and DC is a shy and we wanted to give more time to build confidence in social skills in preschool. But DC is very bright, had strong NNAT and Cogat, good HOPE, good work samples and was rejected. I had a gut feeling that there was a grudge against a so-called "red-shirted" kid. Otherwise the rejection made no sense. DC is a model student, but I imagined the committee shrugging that off as an obvious conclusion for a "red-shirted" kid instead of giving DC credit.

Some good info here: https://naglierigiftedtests.com/

Looks like NGAT is an expanded version of NNAT. It includes the nonverbal section that comprises the NNAT but also has a verbal and quantitative portion (which would more or less line up with what CoGAT was meant to measure).

It seems to have a strong emphasis on identifying gifted students regardless of language spoken at home or prior educational experience, which would seem to be inline with the FCPS emphasis on expanding AAP to students from less advantaged socioeconomic backgrounds.

As to what this 2nd grade cohort will do, I imagine they'll take NGAT this fall. The verbal and quantitative portions will be new to them, and a necessary replacement for the data previously provided by CoGAT. It looks like there are new test items in NGAT for the nonverbal portion, so that won't be an exact repeat of NNAT. I would expect some score inflation for the nonverbal section for students who took NNAT in the spring, as they'll have some familiarity with the question types. But it will be widespread enough (most students took the NNAT) that it should kind of level out anyway.

Then it seems as though they won't do two intelligence tests anymore going forward. Which is not a bad thing, since schools are already doing so much testing in the spring anyway. One less thing taking away from instructional time.

This is all my best guess, though. Take it with a grain of salt.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering that some parents delay their children's school entry by a year, it's difficult to believe that the HOPE assessment is entirely free of bias.

In general, the age distribution in AAP classes skews youngers than gen ed. For reasons that should be obvious.

Not PP but sample size of 1 class last year, my kid was one of the oldest in the class with a feb birthday. There were hardly any oct-dec birthdays.

This does not hold true for our ES.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NGAT will now be used for AAP screening. Does this mean that the NNAT taken last year by the rising 2nd graders are no longer part of the evaluation process? Does anyone know how NGAT differs from CogAt?

Source?

FCPS website testing updates. https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs

Anonymous wrote:NGAT will now be used for AAP screening. Does this mean that the NNAT taken last year by the rising 2nd graders are no longer part of the evaluation process? Does anyone know how NGAT differs from CogAt?

Source?

NGAT will now be used for AAP screening. Does this mean that the NNAT taken last year by the rising 2nd graders are no longer part of the evaluation process? Does anyone know how NGAT differs from CogAt?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering that some parents delay their children's school entry by a year, it's difficult to believe that the HOPE assessment is entirely free of bias.

In general, the age distribution in AAP classes skews youngers than gen ed. For reasons that should be obvious.

Wait? Why?

Parents of bright kids tend not to hold them back, they send them on time.

There is redshirting in FCPS, maybe not as much as some other areas but definitely for the August September birthdays and for many of the summer months. In AAP, most of those birthdays are sent on time instead of redshirting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering that some parents delay their children's school entry by a year, it's difficult to believe that the HOPE assessment is entirely free of bias.

In general, the age distribution in AAP classes skews youngers than gen ed. For reasons that should be obvious.

Not PP but sample size of 1 class last year, my kid was one of the oldest in the class with a feb birthday. There were hardly any oct-dec birthdays.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering that some parents delay their children's school entry by a year, it's difficult to believe that the HOPE assessment is entirely free of bias.

In general, the age distribution in AAP classes skews youngers than gen ed. For reasons that should be obvious.

Is this true? How do you know this? It is true for our family. We could have kept our kids in preschool another year but they were already bored so we moved them to kindergarten at barely 5.

Could that mean they'll randomly use a "nationally normed" test at any given year so that people cannot prep for a specific one?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering that some parents delay their children's school entry by a year, it's difficult to believe that the HOPE assessment is entirely free of bias.

In general, the age distribution in AAP classes skews youngers than gen ed. For reasons that should be obvious.

Wait? Why?

Anonymous wrote:Considering that some parents delay their children's school entry by a year, it's difficult to believe that the HOPE assessment is entirely free of bias.

In general, the age distribution in AAP classes skews youngers than gen ed. For reasons that should be obvious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we are eliminating all objective criteria?

There still remains the HOPE scale. That’s objective.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/objective

"expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations"