Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If FCPS has an issue with a specific tester, they should state it publicly. People ask for WISC recommendations on this board and people have recommended this tester multiple times. The parent then sees that the tester meets the requirements specified by FCPS and uses the tester. Why should the parent/child be penalized for not knowing some secret (if that's the case) FCPS bias against the tester? It would be pretty easy for them to say all testing must be done through GMU. Until then, they shouldn't penalize people for not knowing who is or isn't viewed in a negative light.

Several years ago FCPS met with the Northern Virginia Association of Clinical Psychologists, specifically to reiterate the need for integrity of testing.

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/30/558604.page#8981898

I am not a lawyer, but I would guess "If FCPS has an issue with a specific tester, they should state it publicly" would result in a lawsuit. So they opted to go the professional association path to remind all about integrity of testing.

(And no, I do not know the name of the psychologist that showed up when FCPS AAP staff kept a tally of the WISC results and the name of the psychologist.)

As a poster on the old(er) thread noted -- there was at least one tester who frequently did WISC testing. Just because someone is frequently used does not mean their testing lacks integrity.

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/45/558604.page#8983582

Exactly! They would never name someone for that reason. I am shocked by the scores I see on here. I test 100s of kids a year and it is very rare to see kids in the 130s and above.

But if they won't name individuals because of potential legal ramifications, it's still not fair to unsuspecting parents who use people FCPS has issues with. I needed educational testing done for one of my kids (for concerns about developmental delays, not AAP) and a friend recommended one of the psychologists frequently mentioned on this board. I didn't end up using the psychologist because we figured out what the issue was using our pediatrician, but had I needed the WISC, I would probably have considered that psychologist because of my friend's recommendation. I would not have been trying to game the system, but FCPS would potentially view the scores as invalid. They may not want to have a bad list, but they can say only GMU.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they actually give perfect scores on the neat?

That alone makes me doubtful.

What's so difficult to get? Some kid gets all the answers asked correct...
I would be shocked if you couldn't get a perfect score.
What happens when you get all the answers right? Still not perfect?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like Dr Dahlgren is not the most ethical person and might just be saying things to make parents feel better.

I agree that this thread isn't exactly making her sound professional. However, I'm not putting too much faith in that. I assume that it's more an issue of posters hearing what they want to hear or fudging a bit. Or just pure trolling.

+1

Anonymous wrote:Do they actually give perfect scores on the neat?

That alone makes me doubtful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If FCPS has an issue with a specific tester, they should state it publicly. People ask for WISC recommendations on this board and people have recommended this tester multiple times. The parent then sees that the tester meets the requirements specified by FCPS and uses the tester. Why should the parent/child be penalized for not knowing some secret (if that's the case) FCPS bias against the tester? It would be pretty easy for them to say all testing must be done through GMU. Until then, they shouldn't penalize people for not knowing who is or isn't viewed in a negative light.

Several years ago FCPS met with the Northern Virginia Association of Clinical Psychologists, specifically to reiterate the need for integrity of testing.

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/30/558604.page#8981898

I am not a lawyer, but I would guess "If FCPS has an issue with a specific tester, they should state it publicly" would result in a lawsuit. So they opted to go the professional association path to remind all about integrity of testing.

(And no, I do not know the name of the psychologist that showed up when FCPS AAP staff kept a tally of the WISC results and the name of the psychologist.)

As a poster on the old(er) thread noted -- there was at least one tester who frequently did WISC testing. Just because someone is frequently used does not mean their testing lacks integrity.

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/45/558604.page#8983582

Exactly! They would never name someone for that reason. I am shocked by the scores I see on here. I test 100s of kids a year and it is very rare to see kids in the 130s and above.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hi any update from AAP center on your case. I am also in same situation my daughter is in private school with very strong application and higher test scores, but got rejected.

What are your DC scores - this will be third poster reporting AAP denial.


NNAT 95% COGAT 93% and GBRS 15 (WISC V 98% submitted for appeal)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi all,

My son goes to private school currently and is in 2nd grade

We applied for aap and got rejected with NNAT - 160(99%) and cogat-139 composite score. They said they don’t care much about GBRS from private school teachers, he got 15.

We had taken wisc V with private doc and he got FSIQ 138 and appealed with this score

Today we got an email saying he is not eligible

I went through the forum and also met many FCPS parents, everyone is puzzled with this decision

Has anyone gone through similar experience

Please share

Thanks

Hi any update from AAP center on your case. I am also in same situation my daughter is in private school with very strong application and higher test scores, but got rejected.

What are your DC scores - this will be third poster reporting AAP denial.


NNAT 95% COGAT 93% and GBRS 15 (WISC V 98% submitted for appeal)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If FCPS has an issue with a specific tester, they should state it publicly. People ask for WISC recommendations on this board and people have recommended this tester multiple times. The parent then sees that the tester meets the requirements specified by FCPS and uses the tester. Why should the parent/child be penalized for not knowing some secret (if that's the case) FCPS bias against the tester? It would be pretty easy for them to say all testing must be done through GMU. Until then, they shouldn't penalize people for not knowing who is or isn't viewed in a negative light.

Several years ago FCPS met with the Northern Virginia Association of Clinical Psychologists, specifically to reiterate the need for integrity of testing.

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/30/558604.page#8981898

I am not a lawyer, but I would guess "If FCPS has an issue with a specific tester, they should state it publicly" would result in a lawsuit. So they opted to go the professional association path to remind all about integrity of testing.

(And no, I do not know the name of the psychologist that showed up when FCPS AAP staff kept a tally of the WISC results and the name of the psychologist.)

As a poster on the old(er) thread noted -- there was at least one tester who frequently did WISC testing. Just because someone is frequently used does not mean their testing lacks integrity.

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/45/558604.page#8983582

Anonymous wrote:
If FCPS has an issue with a specific tester, they should state it publicly. People ask for WISC recommendations on this board and people have recommended this tester multiple times. The parent then sees that the tester meets the requirements specified by FCPS and uses the tester. Why should the parent/child be penalized for not knowing some secret (if that's the case) FCPS bias against the tester? It would be pretty easy for them to say all testing must be done through GMU. Until then, they shouldn't penalize people for not knowing who is or isn't viewed in a negative light.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like Dr Dahlgren is not the most ethical person and might just be saying things to make parents feel better.[/quote

I don't like knocking other professionals but it might be the choice of tester. If you scroll back through these forums and look at the scores linked with this doctors name they seem interesting.

Most psychologists see a rough equivalent of the bell curve regarding test scores. In this area you do see more 115-125 FSIQ scores but not the 135-150 I see posted on this board. Certainly not enough to represent the amount of children in the differentiated services in the various public and private schools.

As a tester you have a small amount of lee way when recording and interpreting answers. You certainly can frame things in your clinical interpretation. If FCPS sees a large amount of children coming with inflated scores from one tester over the years...well it will make them pause.

GMU put out two interesting studies (you can use Google scholar to look them up) about children brought in by their parents for WISC testing for the AAP program the average IQ was in the 120s for both studies.

If FCPS has an issue with a specific tester, they should state it publicly. People ask for WISC recommendations on this board and people have recommended this tester multiple times. The parent then sees that the tester meets the requirements specified by FCPS and uses the tester. Why should the parent/child be penalized for not knowing some secret (if that's the case) FCPS bias against the tester? It would be pretty easy for them to say all testing must be done through GMU. Until then, they shouldn't penalize people for not knowing who is or isn't viewed in a negative light.