DS was accepted with a 135 NNAT and 135 CogAT. I just read through his comments on the GBRS. They said things like he enjoys solving math problems using different methods. he uses his time after finishing his work to do independent reading into science and math topics. He is able to take concepts from social studies or in reading and apply it to his life. He is curious and imaginative.

He would not score in the 140’s on the WISC but the comments convey that he could benefit from being in a different type of classroom.

Parents in this topic have said that Teachers didn’t like their kid being social. I read that as the kid is not doing extra work in an area they are interested when they finish their work. The kid might be showing that they are able todo the work they are asked for but they are less internally motivated to learn then the kid pulling out independent math or reading on a new science subject.

As for prepping/tutoring. A smart kid who does what their parent tells them to, like tutoring, will learn the material. They will score well on exams because they are smart and because they have had opportunities to get ahead of their peers. But are they advanced because they are curious and exploring things that interest them or because their parents made them go to tutoring?

Based on the kvetching in this topic, the high WISC kids are not getting great GBRSs and are not seen as being curious or excited to be learning. They would do well in AAP but they might not need AAP.

I still think that every school should have its own AAP class and the top 10-20% of the grade, dependent on the size of the school, should be in AAP. Kids who are not able to maintain the more advanced work should return to the regular class. That way the kids who are in need of more based on their schools situation, are able to have their needs met.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son did not get in on appeal. (Grade 3) To me, it is RIDICULOUS and I agree. DEMAND Re-evaluation. This makes NO SENSE. If there is a petition, I want to SIGN IT! I think due to Covid, less space in the programs!!!

NNAT (Dont remember but was high!)
COGAT (127)
WISC: 133 (99th Percentile)

My son is in Mensa, literally has a Patent Pending for a new game invention he created, and was recommended by a PhD who was an expert on gifted children and written text books (tutors my son) who said he is exceptionally gifted. He is an athlete, a musician, and an amazing public speaker. Does the kid have to be a CEO?

Mensa’s bar is not that high for kids. Your son’s cogat wasn’t at the benchmark and I assume if the nnat was at least at the benchmark, you’d have remembered the score.

I have no idea what you mean when you say your son’s tutor Is an expert on gifted kids.

It sounds like you think your son’s file was screaming gifted. It sounds to me more like it screamed YOU think he’s gifted. Please understand, I have no idea if he’s gifted or not. I’m just addressing how the file presented (with one score definitely above what is believed to be the cut off - wisc). The Mensa admission is duplicative of the wisc score since admission seems to be based on that. The LOR seems more like a throwaway; just saying they LOR is from an “expert” in gifted kids means it was likely not considered heavily. You don’t mention the gbrs.

My son’s school does NOT administer GBRS. Only notes, and not a specific score. I’m not saying he’s gifted. My point is that his score is high enough to be admitted into as ADVANCED program. This is NOT supposed to be a gifted program. And why are kids with lower scores getting in?? My point in Nensa is that they DO allow kids in with a certain IQ. But yet not good enough for the school ? My son has Multiple other activities and referrals at which he has excelled. I’m not just speaking for him. I’m speaking for kids who are even MORE deserving than him here with WISCs of 147 and 149 being rejected. Please explain the logic. In fact, Cogats are commonly prepped for. NOT the WISC.

WISCs are definitely prepped for.

Recommendation for a tutor was the red flag here. Your kid got borderline scores because he had a tutor. Gifted kids don’t need tutors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son did not get in on appeal. (Grade 3) To me, it is RIDICULOUS and I agree. DEMAND Re-evaluation. This makes NO SENSE. If there is a petition, I want to SIGN IT! I think due to Covid, less space in the programs!!!

NNAT (Dont remember but was high!)
COGAT (127)
WISC: 133 (99th Percentile)

My son is in Mensa, literally has a Patent Pending for a new game invention he created, and was recommended by a PhD who was an expert on gifted children and written text books (tutors my son) who said he is exceptionally gifted. He is an athlete, a musician, and an amazing public speaker. Does the kid have to be a CEO?

Mensa’s bar is not that high for kids. Your son’s cogat wasn’t at the benchmark and I assume if the nnat was at least at the benchmark, you’d have remembered the score.

I have no idea what you mean when you say your son’s tutor Is an expert on gifted kids.

It sounds like you think your son’s file was screaming gifted. It sounds to me more like it screamed YOU think he’s gifted. Please understand, I have no idea if he’s gifted or not. I’m just addressing how the file presented (with one score definitely above what is believed to be the cut off - wisc). The Mensa admission is duplicative of the wisc score since admission seems to be based on that. The LOR seems more like a throwaway; just saying they LOR is from an “expert” in gifted kids means it was likely not considered heavily. You don’t mention the gbrs.

My son’s school does NOT administer GBRS. Only notes, and not a specific score. I’m not saying he’s gifted. My point is that his score is high enough to be admitted into as ADVANCED program. This is NOT supposed to be a gifted program. And why are kids with lower scores getting in?? My point in Nensa is that they DO allow kids in with a certain IQ. But yet not good enough for the school ? My son has Multiple other activities and referrals at which he has excelled. I’m not just speaking for him. I’m speaking for kids who are even MORE deserving than him here with WISCs of 147 and 149 being rejected. Please explain the logic. In fact, Cogats are commonly prepped for. NOT the WISC.

So he was coming from a private school? It has seemed in the past harder to get in from private. I hope it wasn’t nysmith.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a common theme for rejections after reading many of these threads. Is it possible that parents who have tutors submit recommendations and who heavily enrich their children are more likely to be denied? I think if I was on the selection committee and I read that a child has a tutor or participated in expensive enrichment classes, I would think the high scores were just a result of the heavy enrichment (something most other kids could achieve if they had similiar priviledge). I might not think this kid "needed" aap because their parents could just continue to enrich on their own.

OTOH if I read about a child who had a high interest in a specific subject (i.e. bridges), work samples included the child's bridge designs, parent and teacher commentary included how the child was always researching bridges and how the child even got into a little trouble for building bridges during class time, I might think this child "needed" aap for i.e. the flexibility in learning, specialized teachers, etc.

Many people used tutors during the COVID-19 Virtual downtime. Because they were working and didn’t have time. Tutors are pretty common to use. They work with the kids. So they know them and their working style. I would think they are a good gauge in addition to the other coaches etc.

Ok, in our area, I don’t know anyone who uses a tutor, except a family with a child with learning disabilities. It is really not common to use a tutor. And I wonder if the tutor recs were a turnoff.

That said: a wisc from a reputable psychologist (not one associated with a testing school) is the gold standard and anyone with a wisc over 130 should have been easily admitted.

/chesterbrook elementary Gifted Ed counselor. A.V. is responsible for so many bad things at the school, not just AAP decisions. She is so fustrating and low IQ when you talk with her

Anonymous wrote:

That’s odd bc I just looked at my son’s entire packet as submitted by the school In February and his ethnicity is not listed anywhere. There isn’t even a question on the form. They did ask what language the child speaks but no ethnicity question.

I just looked at my child's packet from the 2017-2018 school year, and on the Screening Summary Sheet, under the student's name, ID, date of birth, and gender, it very clearly lists "Federal Ethnic Code" and then the ethnicity. Unless they changed things, ethnicity is there. Even if they did, the blanks for Young Scholars, Languages spoken other than English, and the child's name should give them a pretty good clue as to the ethnicity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I JUST looked at my son’s GBRS report. Right ON the cover, it says ETHNICITY: ASIAN.

So YES, they DO know race. Is it a factor? Likely in terms of how many are being let in. And maybe even more so this year it seems.

We're unfortunately of an ethnicity that has to face discrimination from time to time. It's not Asian, but it's still one that would be obvious from the name.

AAP is supposed to be one of those refreshing things where ethnicity doesn't matter as much, because if your kid is good, they're good, and there's not much else to be said about it. Well, looks like FCPS managed to find a way to screw that up too.

That’s odd bc I just looked at my son’s entire packet as submitted by the school In February and his ethnicity is not listed anywhere. There isn’t even a question on the form. They did ask what language the child speaks but no ethnicity question.

Just to provide another data point, we're zoned for a high-FARMS/ESL school and--much to my surprise--DC was admitted in the first round with a COGAT of 115 (not an URM). Our school typically has a lower number of applicants, but I know of no one who applied and didn't get in on the first round. Many had scores in a similar range. I firmly believe the base school has an impact.

Anonymous wrote:
I JUST looked at my son’s GBRS report. Right ON the cover, it says ETHNICITY: ASIAN.

So YES, they DO know race. Is it a factor? Likely in terms of how many are being let in. And maybe even more so this year it seems.

We're unfortunately of an ethnicity that has to face discrimination from time to time. It's not Asian, but it's still one that would be obvious from the name.

AAP is supposed to be one of those refreshing things where ethnicity doesn't matter as much, because if your kid is good, they're good, and there's not much else to be said about it. Well, looks like FCPS managed to find a way to screw that up too.

Anonymous wrote:Lots of white people prep too, so Asians shouldn't be singled out.

To my knowledge, there hasn't been a study on the effect of prepping on WISC scores. It would be interesting to see it, though.

If the kid has high scores on WISC, high scores on CogAT or NNAT, a high DRA, high achievement scores, etc, it's more likely that the kid is very smart than it is that the kid has been prepped for everything. Some of the kids getting rejected have high stats all around.

If FCPS is that concerned about the integrity of the WISC, they should only accept them from GMU.

I agree. In the contexts that I'm seeing people mentioning prepping, it's seeming less and less like the system is worried about kids getting an unfair advantage, and more and more like they're xenophobic against kids that take education seriously.

Lots of white people prep too, so Asians shouldn't be singled out.

To my knowledge, there hasn't been a study on the effect of prepping on WISC scores. It would be interesting to see it, though.

If the kid has high scores on WISC, high scores on CogAT or NNAT, a high DRA, high achievement scores, etc, it's more likely that the kid is very smart than it is that the kid has been prepped for everything. Some of the kids getting rejected have high stats all around.

If FCPS is that concerned about the integrity of the WISC, they should only accept them from GMU.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child is at an AAP center and I was told by two teachers they heard that the county is trying to reduce the number in AAP because it has become watered down. And the reason for a larger pool to consider was to identify those in minority groups whose parents might not apply on their own. Both make sense to me. But many parents are upset because they assumed if they were in the pool that acceptance would be a breeze.

Yeah. The program has become too watered down, so the way to fix it is to get rid of all of those pesky 99th percentile kids. Sounds legit.

When Bernie talked down the 1%, I don't think this is what he meant...

Is prepping didn’t help with a wisc, you could take it more than once every 12 mo.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
WISCs are definitely prepped for.

People might try to prep for a WISC, but there's no evidence that doing so will increase a kid's score by more than a few points. If the kid seems overly prepared, the psychologist will make a note of that in the report, and the IQ score will be considered invalid. WISC questions and even the nature of the questions are more closely guarded than those for CogAT or NNAT, and the test is much more comprehensive. People who are going to prep will just do so for the CogAT and NNAT, as prepping can increase those scores by 10 or so points without that much effort.

I think the naysayers in this thread either don't understand or don't believe in IQ tests. FSIQ scores above 140 are ridiculously high. I don't care if those kids are showing nothing at all to their teachers. They are beyond gifted and need gifted services. The gap between an IQ 140 kid and most of the kids in AAP is the same as the gap between a typical AAP kid and a completely average kid. Kids who score just a 130 are still going to be among the smartest kids within AAP, so keeping them out is silly. The only reason scores above 130 don't "seem high" is that IQ tests from 30 years ago either used ratio scales or were inflated, so more kids received high scores.

There were many postings in the last few years about how Asians "prep" their kids for WISC since 1st grade and posters mercilessly mocking them for supposed "prepping" and how some of the Asian stores supposedly sell prepping materials etc. So, Asians preparing for WISC is to be attacked and mocked but non-Asians "prepping" is just fine and dandy- totally legitimate, WISC can't be prepped etc. Which is it? Only Asians are supposed to be attacked for preparing for WISC and only their scores are to be discounted due to prepping?

Similar with SAT (SAT was originally developed to test for Intelligence of soldiers decades ago), Asians preparing for SAT is to be mocked and high scores of Asians are to be discounted due to prepping even though English may be a second language for many Asian students and SAT is not composed of only the Math section and includes Reading/Writing section. Why is it that only Asian students are attacked for preparing for "tests"? Too many hypocrites on this board.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a common theme for rejections after reading many of these threads. Is it possible that parents who have tutors submit recommendations and who heavily enrich their children are more likely to be denied? I think if I was on the selection committee and I read that a child has a tutor or participated in expensive enrichment classes, I would think the high scores were just a result of the heavy enrichment (something most other kids could achieve if they had similiar priviledge). I might not think this kid "needed" aap because their parents could just continue to enrich on their own.

OTOH if I read about a child who had a high interest in a specific subject (i.e. bridges), work samples included the child's bridge designs, parent and teacher commentary included how the child was always researching bridges and how the child even got into a little trouble for building bridges during class time, I might think this child "needed" aap for i.e. the flexibility in learning, specialized teachers, etc.

Many people used tutors during the COVID-19 Virtual downtime. Because they were working and didn’t have time. Tutors are pretty common to use. They work with the kids. So they know them and their working style. I would think they are a good gauge in addition to the other coaches etc.

PP here. But that would emphasize your priviledge and thus your lack of need for aap. How amazing for a child that self taught themselves subjects or maintained academic advancement is the face of covid hardships (lack of parental support, loss of parent, special need, esl, etc.).

We are in FAIRFAX... People have a lot of money in the majority of this area! To the extent that people are switching to very $$ private schools this year so their kids won’t be doing virtual education! I am pretty sure the AAP board is aware of this, in particular based on the schools you are zoned in. It’s pretty common in Fairfax to use tutors. People are hiring full time teachers in even average income Fairfax neighborhoods (for Fairfax standards) due to the virtual environment. So a BULK of AAP kids in Fairfax DO come from privileged backgrounds.