OP -- AAP expects a high level of verbal ability (including logic and comprehension as well as being able to decode and remember relatively complex spelling words and their meanings).

I think being strong in verbal skills is pretty important. You can still get the WISC and if you need it for an appeal, you can submit it. You can also use the wisc to confirm that your child is/isn't strong in this area -- which may inform your decision to pursue or not pursue AAP. 108 is a pretty low score, and even 118 is pretty low for AAP verbal. I'd be curious to know if that rings true to what you normally see in his/her school work and speech.

If you have the money for a wisc, it would be a good idea. If not, base your decision on what your child's normal verbal performance is.

When did you receive the Cogat scores? I havent received as yet but got a letter statinv my child is in the screening pool. Does this mean the letter was based off on NNAT scores only?

Anonymous wrote:Not to make a tense situation worse, but... I have always heard that the verbal is the most important CogAT subtest score because reading comp is so necessary to succeed in all areas of Level IV. A 109 kid either had a freak test or will have trouble keeping up. And a 109 with high NNAT, etc, looks a lot like a level III/ advanced math candidate than an overall LLIV kid. If you think the verbal is wrong, I'd get a WISC and look had at the verbal subtest, and a W-J, and look hard at reading comp. but if you are only really strong in one area -- that's Level III.

Thank you for your advice on the options. For the submission due by Friday I think we don't have enough time, we may perhaps do this at a later date.

Not to make a tense situation worse, but... I have always heard that the verbal is the most important CogAT subtest score because reading comp is so necessary to succeed in all areas of Level IV. A 109 kid either had a freak test or will have trouble keeping up. And a 109 with high NNAT, etc, looks a lot like a level III/ advanced math candidate than an overall LLIV kid. If you think the verbal is wrong, I'd get a WISC and look had at the verbal subtest, and a W-J, and look hard at reading comp. but if you are only really strong in one area -- that's Level III.

sorry meant to say "NNAT which is non-verbal"

Her NNAT which is on verbal was in high 150s, so don't know if screening committee will interpret low verbal score.

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering if OP's child missed a page in the booklet or somehow didn't answer a lot of questions? I would be inclined to pay for a WISC if my child was like that and seemed to be getting along pretty well with reading at school.

If that score on verbal holds true, I would be worried about putting my kid in AAP. It is very language intensive. That is not my child's strong suit (the one who got in... the one who didn't get in had a 149 verbal but more like a 118 quant). Anyway.... I would hesitate to put a kid in AAP with a 108 verbal.... what percentile is that for local? I think my AAP kid was 95th percentile national and 92nd local. He has a bit of a challenge when it comes to the writing -- but he does pretty well with the spelling/meanings and reading.

She answered all the verbal questions, and is quite strong in verbal so was surprised by the low score. Thanks for the advice on WISC, but it's probably late to explore this option now since submission deadline is Friday.

It might be a fluke. I always thought of my DC as a "math child", yet his Cogat quantitative section was the weakest of all; can't remember the scores but it it was, I think, 76th percentile locally (somewhat higher nationally). The composite score was in pool but low enough for me to go and have him WISC'ed. The WISC math section came out very decent. Also, DC's AAP teacher thinks math is his area of strength. So it must have been an off day for Cogat, or an oversight of something very simple.

This is where the Center model falls apart. Not all "advanced" kids are advanced in everything, but admission is an all-or-nothing binary proposition. And if kids can opt out of advanced math or such, then why not just have a LLIV model at all schools, and allow kids to be placed in the appropriate level by subject matter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering if OP's child missed a page in the booklet or somehow didn't answer a lot of questions? I would be inclined to pay for a WISC if my child was like that and seemed to be getting along pretty well with reading at school.

If that score on verbal holds true, I would be worried about putting my kid in AAP. It is very language intensive. That is not my child's strong suit (the one who got in... the one who didn't get in had a 149 verbal but more like a 118 quant). Anyway.... I would hesitate to put a kid in AAP with a 108 verbal.... what percentile is that for local? I think my AAP kid was 95th percentile national and 92nd local. He has a bit of a challenge when it comes to the writing -- but he does pretty well with the spelling/meanings and reading.

What about a 118 verbal (75th% national)?

Isn't verbal based more on exposure than anything else. Not really a measure of intelligence.

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering if OP's child missed a page in the booklet or somehow didn't answer a lot of questions? I would be inclined to pay for a WISC if my child was like that and seemed to be getting along pretty well with reading at school.

If that score on verbal holds true, I would be worried about putting my kid in AAP. It is very language intensive. That is not my child's strong suit (the one who got in... the one who didn't get in had a 149 verbal but more like a 118 quant). Anyway.... I would hesitate to put a kid in AAP with a 108 verbal.... what percentile is that for local? I think my AAP kid was 95th percentile national and 92nd local. He has a bit of a challenge when it comes to the writing -- but he does pretty well with the spelling/meanings and reading.

What about a 118 verbal (75th% national)?

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering if OP's child missed a page in the booklet or somehow didn't answer a lot of questions? I would be inclined to pay for a WISC if my child was like that and seemed to be getting along pretty well with reading at school.

If that score on verbal holds true, I would be worried about putting my kid in AAP. It is very language intensive. That is not my child's strong suit (the one who got in... the one who didn't get in had a 149 verbal but more like a 118 quant). Anyway.... I would hesitate to put a kid in AAP with a 108 verbal.... what percentile is that for local? I think my AAP kid was 95th percentile national and 92nd local. He has a bit of a challenge when it comes to the writing -- but he does pretty well with the spelling/meanings and reading.

I would not worry about the 108 if your child doesn't struggle with reading (including comprehension) and writing, especially if your child "nearly aced" the other two parts. The math is intensified, but I haven't found the language arts that impressive (based on what my two kids have brought home). There are a lot of kids in AAP who are stronger in math.

Anonymous wrote:I have same situation as OP. Verbal 106 and composite is 129. We are planning to submit referral packet. Does my DD have any chance?

Slightly different from OP because her kid is in the pool with a composite of 138. Your kid isn't unless the NNAT puts your kid in the pool. I think your kid certainly has a chance, dependent on GBRS and NNAT. I think without some other score supporting admission, however, the chances are mediocre.

Anonymous wrote:I have same situation as OP. Verbal 106 and composite is 129. We are planning to submit referral packet. Does my DD have any chance?

That's not really the same, bc OP's kid had a 138 composite. We can't guess your chances without knowing NNAT and likely GBRS. With a NNAT in the 120s and strong support from the school, your kid has a chance.

I have same situation as OP. Verbal 106 and composite is 129. We are planning to submit referral packet. Does my DD have any chance?