Anonymous wrote:A few cherry picked writing samples determine whether a child gets into AAP? Really? I find that hard to believe.
I would weigh a test, even if given just one day, much more heavily than a few select representative writing samples. Especially if another test is repeated the following year.
Unless that is some amazing writing sample, which probably applies to a very small percentage of children.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:PP, had great work samples including fourth grade level math (solving multiple step multiplication and division problems) and a very well written essay.
So what? Since when work samples trump everything else?
Since the screening committee became aware of the extent of prepping for the tests, so they place more emphasis on other evidence.
My child's teacher submitted writing samples that showed the ability to think about and formulate ideas in a mature way. One essay had won an essay contest judged by the school's outside business sponsor.
If that's the case, then why the lower GBRS? Or the not-so-perfect report card grades? Why a WISC of 120? If everything else points to an OK (but not stellar) performer, I don't think that any kind of work samples should matter...
Sorry, I posted the bolded post and I am not the same as the earlier poster.
Work samples, especially those produced at school, are important because they show what the child actually can do and give insight into how the child thinks. While a test is only one day, work samples are produced over time. Writing samples are particularly useful in showing a child's thought process. They're worthwhile in that they help to give a fuller picture of the types of behaviors the child is exhibiting in class.
Anonymous wrote:Many children could not shown their thinking process in their writings! I teach in college and many of my best students are not good writers at all. They formulate innovative hypothesis, do great experiment, solve problems, and logically put all things together; however, their writings are sub-bar. Some even need help from writing centers. Many great writers cannot do these. That is why there are different majors. Using writing samples to judge potential is too narrow. As a science teacher, I see testing score as a much better predictor than writing samples.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:PP, had great work samples including fourth grade level math (solving multiple step multiplication and division problems) and a very well written essay.
So what? Since when work samples trump everything else?
Since the screening committee became aware of the extent of prepping for the tests, so they place more emphasis on other evidence.
My child's teacher submitted writing samples that showed the ability to think about and formulate ideas in a mature way. One essay had won an essay contest judged by the school's outside business sponsor.
If that's the case, then why the lower GBRS? Or the not-so-perfect report card grades? Why a WISC of 120? If everything else points to an OK (but not stellar) performer, I don't think that any kind of work samples should matter...
Sorry, I posted the bolded post and I am not the same as the earlier poster.
Work samples, especially those produced at school, are important because they show what the child actually can do and give insight into how the child thinks. While a test is only one day, work samples are produced over time. Writing samples are particularly useful in showing a child's thought process. They're worthwhile in that they help to give a fuller picture of the types of behaviors the child is exhibiting in class.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:PP, had great work samples including fourth grade level math (solving multiple step multiplication and division problems) and a very well written essay.
So what? Since when work samples trump everything else?
Since the screening committee became aware of the extent of prepping for the tests, so they place more emphasis on other evidence.
My child's teacher submitted writing samples that showed the ability to think about and formulate ideas in a mature way. One essay had won an essay contest judged by the school's outside business sponsor.
If that's the case, then why the lower GBRS? Or the not-so-perfect report card grades? Why a WISC of 120? If everything else points to an OK (but not stellar) performer, I don't think that any kind of work samples should matter...
Anonymous wrote:DC ACCEPTED. 83% FAT, 121 NNAT, GBRS 11, Wisc 120. Mostly 3s, two 4s, and a couple of 2s on report card. Parent referral.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wroteC ACCEPTED. 83% FAT, 121 NNAT, GBRS 11, Wisc 120. Mostly 3s, two 4s, and a couple of 2s on report card. Parent referral.
That was my DC. Again, work samples can trup everything. AART had some amazing work samples for my DC and I assume that the panel saw them and realized test scores were not an accurate reflection of the ability/intelligence level. Thank goodness the AART at our school cared!