Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 16:11     Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:
FCPS's holistic approach weighs the test scores with Teacher input. I don't see too many people with 4CO and a higher CogAT or WISC not being accepted. I do see high test scores with GBRS's that include Occasionally Observe not being accepted. That seems to be a big part of the trend. I get it, parents are annoyed that their kids are bored and need more of a challenge but don't seem to be able to wrap their heads around the fact that the Teachers are not seeing it that way. They don't see the bored genius, they see the kid distracting others who isn't finishing his work. Is that because they are bored or have ADHD or are just not interested in being in school because they are 7. The report says that FCPS needs something better then the GBRSs but do you really think that a kid who is not completing their work and chatting with their neighbors is going to do well on any Teacher observation/evaluation? Your kids Teachers are going to be involved in the selection process.


Why do you assume that a lower GBRS means that the kid isn't completing the work or is chatting with neighbors? There have been numerous cases here of kids who are above grade level in all subjects, get straight 4s, and still get low GBRS. I've posted before about my DD who had a K, 1st, and 3rd GBRS of 15s and 16s, but a 2nd GBRS that was low. My DD was in the top groups and always completed her work, so there were no issues there. In this case, the teacher was a huge neat freak, so she interpreted my DD's sloppiness as not being motivated to do better rather than as a sign that my DD's fine motor skills were still developing. My DD also didn't raise her hand very much because a few other kids were bullying her, and she didn't want to do anything to call attention to herself. She was also afraid of her teacher, since her biggest bully was the teacher's pet. Why should that teacher's biased opinion be the end all and be all of the program? Amazingly, the year after apparently not showing any gifted traits, my DD once again became a gifted student by the teacher's metrics.

If they used a more comprehensive gifted behavior rating scale, and if they solicited input from more than just the classroom teacher, my DD certainly would have had a higher rating in 2nd. I know someone will show up claiming that GBRS is decided upon in a committee, but when the committee includes the classroom teacher and two people who've never interacted with your child, it ends up being the classroom teacher's sole viewpoint. If every school asked the 2nd grade teacher, the 1st grade teacher, any reading or math specialists with whom your child has worked, or maybe even the music, art, or steam lab teachers for their opinions, a much more accurate rating would result.
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 16:08     Subject: Re:FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It would seem somewhat cynical to me if parents dedicate all they can to their child's education, resulting in the child's respect for education and high test scores, resulting in the AAP committee using that to infer that they'd have been much weaker without enrichment. It comes across as a success tax and a penalty to those people who think that FCPS should be operating on a higher level to begin with.


If the child respects their education then the child will be finishing their work and doing extra work without prompting leading the higher GBRS's and fewer complaints about the child being disruptive.



In case of our child, their teacher wasn't the one assigning the GBRS score, but rather a different specialty teacher, who our child claims they barely ever spoke with. The comments from the regular teacher on the GBRS were great and reflect the idea that the child is advanced. They've told us that the child is a model student. The other teacher, the one who assigned the scores, had many gaps in knowledge about our child. So we're supposed to believe that this GBRS is the primary thing which should determine our child's eligibility, when all of their test scores are high, across the board?

Anonymous wrote:
And let's keep in mind that we are talking about 7 and 8 year olds here. A child may very well go to tutoring and do the extra work because their parents make them. That does not equate with "respecting education." That means that his/her parents respect education and the kid knows better than to say no. FCPS discounting those activities is a way of saying "where would you child be if they didn't do an extra 2 hours of math at AoPS every weekend." Is your child doing well because they are gifted or because they being pushed ahead by their parents? My kid asks to do robotics and chess and coding club because they are fun and engaging. He gets to hang out with friends for an extra hour, build things, and play games. My kid has never asked to go for extra math tutoring. He does ask his Dad to make up math problems for him and he does love solving logic puzzles. we asked him about math tutoring this past spring because DL was not exactly exciting and he looked at us like we were crazy.


Sure, we all have stories about how our child is a brilliant little bubble of academic inspiration, yet as we can see happening here, due to the unusual selection criteria, some people's stories have gotten chosen as valid, while others, quite sarcastically get put down for not respecting education, when it's quite certainly unfair.

In the first place, a school should be objective, and there should be no place for the notion of "I don't feel as though your child isn't advanced enough." It reminds me of what happened to some friends of ours (who happened to be an URM), the teacher told the parents that they didn't feel like he was doing well in math, only to look up the test scores and see that they were almost all 100s.
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 15:26     Subject: Re:FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It would seem somewhat cynical to me if parents dedicate all they can to their child's education, resulting in the child's respect for education and high test scores, resulting in the AAP committee using that to infer that they'd have been much weaker without enrichment. It comes across as a success tax and a penalty to those people who think that FCPS should be operating on a higher level to begin with.


If the child respects their education then the child will be finishing their work and doing extra work without prompting leading the higher GBRS's and fewer complaints about the child being disruptive.


It sounds like you're making up a scenario in an attempt to justify a lousy screening paradigm
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 14:59     Subject: Re:FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:It would seem somewhat cynical to me if parents dedicate all they can to their child's education, resulting in the child's respect for education and high test scores, resulting in the AAP committee using that to infer that they'd have been much weaker without enrichment. It comes across as a success tax and a penalty to those people who think that FCPS should be operating on a higher level to begin with.


If the child respects their education then the child will be finishing their work and doing extra work without prompting leading the higher GBRS's and fewer complaints about the child being disruptive.

And let's keep in mind that we are talking about 7 and 8 year olds here. A child may very well go to tutoring and do the extra work because their parents make them. That does not equate with "respecting education." That means that his/her parents respect education and the kid knows better than to say no. FCPS discounting those activities is a way of saying "where would you child be if they didn't do an extra 2 hours of math at AoPS every weekend." Is your child doing well because they are gifted or because they being pushed ahead by their parents? My kid asks to do robotics and chess and coding club because they are fun and engaging. He gets to hang out with friends for an extra hour, build things, and play games. My kid has never asked to go for extra math tutoring. He does ask his Dad to make up math problems for him and he does love solving logic puzzles. we asked him about math tutoring this past spring because DL was not exactly exciting and he looked at us like we were crazy.



Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 14:57     Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
But why are race and SES being correlated so strongly? There are plenty of upper middle class black and hispanic kids who receive a lot of enrichment. There are also poorer white and Asian kids who don't. I would agree with most of your points and most of the ones in the equity report if they focused purely on SES and not race. FARMS kids and lower middle class kids are going to be disadvantaged, regardless of the child's race.


Isn't this the basis of a lot of the larger conversation about race right now? Systemic racism in the US and how it has impacted Blacks over the history of the US. It is messy and hard to trace. It does not explain everything but does point to how an education gap developed and now is widening. And how do you solve that?


A lot of the racial education gap is based on poverty. But, making it easier for wealthier URMs with educated parents to get into programs like AAP will not help anything. If they want to be equitable and help fix the education gap, then AAP should give a boost to poorer kids who seem bright, rather than to wealthy URMs who are receiving a ton of enrichment. They would in turn still be targeting more URMs for services, since the poverty rate is generally higher for URMs than it is for whites or Asians.
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 14:54     Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I would love to see the data for race, sex, school, cogat scores, nnat scores, gbrs, dra, and wisc scores (when available) and accepted/rejected. I bet there would be some shocking trends.

They'll never let you see that.


Why not? Why couldn't you FOIA that information? There's no personal sensitive information in what you're asking--you're not asking for the child's name! I think it's entire possible to FOIA it, and it can't be held back as 'deliberative' especially if deliberation has already occurred and it's not a matter of national security, but rather transparency in a process against program criteria/claim. I think FCAG could easily make the request and publish their findings, if they wanted to.


I'm not sure what a FOIA could turn up, I'm just basing it on the fact that we've sent multiple emails trying to clarify the basis of the decision and gotten multiple responses with some variant of the nebulous "it's a holistic process!" claim.


Write to Tammy at FCAG. She is more responsive.
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 14:48     Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Since some people might have missed it, here is a link to the AAP equity report:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BPD4M50C2B1F/$file/FCPS%20final%20report%2005.05.20.pdf

If you scroll down to page 66, you can see average CogAT and NNAT scores of LIV eligible kids broken down by race. It's very enlightening. For the kids who got accepted to AAP - CogAT Q score: Asian mean = 130.95. AA mean: 119.8 Hispanic mean: 118.9


I believe that the report addresses some of that as well. Part of that gap is explained by a gap in enrichment opportunities. Kids who have been read to, speak the language natively, attend enrichment classes or programs (tutoring or robotics or coding club) are likely to score better on those types of tests. we can kvetch all we want about them being IQ tests but additional education and stimulation are going to improve scores on tests like the NNAT, CogAT, and yes, even the WISC.


But why are race and SES being correlated so strongly? There are plenty of upper middle class black and hispanic kids who receive a lot of enrichment. There are also poorer white and Asian kids who don't. I would agree with most of your points and most of the ones in the equity report if they focused purely on SES and not race. FARMS kids and lower middle class kids are going to be disadvantaged, regardless of the child's race.


Isn't this the basis of a lot of the larger conversation about race right now? Systemic racism in the US and how it has impacted Blacks over the history of the US. It is messy and hard to trace. It does not explain everything but does point to how an education gap developed and now is widening. And how do you solve that?
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 14:47     Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I would love to see the data for race, sex, school, cogat scores, nnat scores, gbrs, dra, and wisc scores (when available) and accepted/rejected. I bet there would be some shocking trends.

They'll never let you see that.


Why not? Why couldn't you FOIA that information? There's no personal sensitive information in what you're asking--you're not asking for the child's name! I think it's entire possible to FOIA it, and it can't be held back as 'deliberative' especially if deliberation has already occurred and it's not a matter of national security, but rather transparency in a process against program criteria/claim. I think FCAG could easily make the request and publish their findings, if they wanted to.


I'm not sure what a FOIA could turn up, I'm just basing it on the fact that we've sent multiple emails trying to clarify the basis of the decision and gotten multiple responses with some variant of the nebulous "it's a holistic process!" claim.
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 14:40     Subject: Re:FCPS Appeals decision are out
It would seem somewhat cynical to me if parents dedicate all they can to their child's education, resulting in the child's respect for education and high test scores, resulting in the AAP committee using that to infer that they'd have been much weaker without enrichment. It comes across as a success tax and a penalty to those people who think that FCPS should be operating on a higher level to begin with.
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 14:40     Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
^If test scores are not considered valid, achievement scores are not valid, GBRS is not valid (which is true -- it's not a psychometrically valid measurement. It's also not drawing from a large enough cross section of teachers, and kids who are more advanced due to enrichment will look better to the teacher), isn't that a compelling argument to make AAP open enrollment for everyone who can keep up with the pace? It would make much more sense than trying to guess which kids are prepped and then rejecting kids with high scores.
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 14:37     Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:The most equitable thing, though, is to teach every kid at a level appropriate for that kid's intelligence and current abilities. It is not fair or equitable to refuse to teach a child at an appropriate level because that child's race is overrepresented in the advanced classes. Likewise, it makes no sense to pull a child up to a level higher than what is appropriate for that child, just to balance the races.

One important thing that should be asked, though, is why gen ed programs are largely failing to provide appropriate education for their advanced learners. My oldest went through gen ed, and while this child has consistently tested at the capped DRA and has consistently had perfect scores on the reading SOL, my child was not able to receive above grade level language arts instruction. The school's excuse was that they didn't have enough advanced kids to offer an above grade level reading group, so instead my child had to be pulled down to a lower level. I didn't push the issue, since my child's reading group only met with the teacher for 15 minutes/week, and spent the other 485 minutes "working independently."

People would be less obsessed with AAP if gen ed had advanced math starting in 3rd, above grade level reading groups for all who quality, and enough reading group facetime with the teacher to even count as being educated and not educating yourself during that time.


And that is why the report suggested AAP at each school based on the needs of each school. A Title 1 school is going to have different needs then a school in McLean.

I just fear that the educational acceleration will only get worse at some schools because parents want their kids in the school based program. I am pretty thrilled that my kids school seems to have lots of parents who don't worry about AAP. It removes some of the pressure to push kids because you want the best for them and just let them learn how they learn.
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 14:32     Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Since some people might have missed it, here is a link to the AAP equity report:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BPD4M50C2B1F/$file/FCPS%20final%20report%2005.05.20.pdf

If you scroll down to page 66, you can see average CogAT and NNAT scores of LIV eligible kids broken down by race. It's very enlightening. For the kids who got accepted to AAP - CogAT Q score: Asian mean = 130.95. AA mean: 119.8 Hispanic mean: 118.9


I believe that the report addresses some of that as well. Part of that gap is explained by a gap in enrichment opportunities. Kids who have been read to, speak the language natively, attend enrichment classes or programs (tutoring or robotics or coding club) are likely to score better on those types of tests. we can kvetch all we want about them being IQ tests but additional education and stimulation are going to improve scores on tests like the NNAT, CogAT, and yes, even the WISC.

They also presented some good solutions. Every school should have a full time AART. This would bolster level II and Level III programs at schools. With better Level III programs, there would be less pressure to get a kid who is strong in math but on grade level in LA or strong in LA and on grade level on math into AAP to make sure that the child's strong area receives the attention it deserves.

They also suggested that each school should have its own AAP program and determinations for entrance should be made based on the individual schools population. So schools with highly involved parents invested in enrichment programs will end up with a program that looks different then the Title 1 schools. That would also address a lot of the issues with diversity.

Finally, they recommend not allowing parents to submit additional material, including WISCs, and doing away with appeals. Mainly because there is a real bias towards who is likely to include additional materials and appeal.

The reality is that committee members know how test scores can be increased through enrichment. My son was at an advantage because he did robotics and coding club and chess club after school. It wasn't a math program but it still teaches logical thinking and engineering and mathematical concepts in a fun way. The kid at a Title 1 school was far less likely to even have those programs offered, nevermind joining those programs.

While I have no doubt that the kids scoring in the 140's on the WISC are very smart, I am not going to pretend that families that can afford the WISC have not been providing enrichment which is going to influence how their child does on the WISC. And the kid who is at a Title 1 school who scores a 118 on the CogAT could probably score a good deal higher if they had been as exposed to math and English concepts through their home environment and enrichment programs.

And that is why the committee does not weigh the test scores as highly as you all wish that they would.

AAP needs to be changed but I am not sure that everyone here would be thrilled if the change is that only 10% per grade level is placed in a school based AAP. Because I suspect that how ever they adjust the application process, the competition at the non Title 1 schools will become even greater then it is now. And I doubt too many of you would want to move to the areas with the Title 1 schools to insure that your kid is in AAP.


Agreeably, there are many more opportunities in nicer neighborhoods, wealthier areas. Just go to Mclean! Parents have no issue paying whatever because they can. But what about the kids who score high just because? They may live in a wealthy district and be Asian. But why ASSUME they were prepped? And also, Cogat classes are publicly EVERYWHERE. You can buy books right on Amazon. There are virtual classes, in person classes etc. It is obviously out there. Same with the NNATS. So they would literally need to ban these businesses to stop kids from taking these classes because TONS of AAP kids are taking them. And parents also think, we can afford it, and when others are prepping, why should my kid be left behind? If people can afford it, they will try to give that leg up but I don’t think that is for the AAP Board to decide what the child did and didn’t do. I understand LOWERING the standard for certain groups due to a lack of opportunities. But I do NOT understand RAISING the standard for Asian Americans, for example. This is not fair to the kids who work hard and score well.


The classes and books are there and they can't be banned but that is why those scores are discounted. The tests are too easy to prep. The WISC scores are going to be influenced by enrichment opportunities, I am not saying that people are prepping for the WISC, I am saying that if your child is willing to participate in tutoring or interested in/willing to participate in coding, chess, robotics or other similar clubs they are going to learn problem solving techniques and creative thinking that other kids will not. Those skills will help them on tests like the WISC. The committee knows this. So do they take a 140 WISC and other high scores on their own, knowing how they can be influenced and knowing that there is a significant portion of the counties population who cannot afford those enrichment opportunities or to pay for a WISC, or do the weight them with something else?

FCPS's holistic approach weighs the test scores with Teacher input. I don't see too many people with 4CO and a higher CogAT or WISC not being accepted. I do see high test scores with GBRS's that include Occasionally Observe not being accepted. That seems to be a big part of the trend. I get it, parents are annoyed that their kids are bored and need more of a challenge but don't seem to be able to wrap their heads around the fact that the Teachers are not seeing it that way. They don't see the bored genius, they see the kid distracting others who isn't finishing his work. Is that because they are bored or have ADHD or are just not interested in being in school because they are 7. The report says that FCPS needs something better then the GBRSs but do you really think that a kid who is not completing their work and chatting with their neighbors is going to do well on any Teacher observation/evaluation? Your kids Teachers are going to be involved in the selection process.

FCPS is not likely to put a lot of weight on letters of recommendation, the report recommends getting rid of those, because the people writing them are either paid by the parents or are volunteers in a program. Are they really going to rock the boat and say that a child is anything but amazing? If I am a tutor or run an enrichment program or a center, am I going to risk losing a client, maybe more then one if the parent complains about the letter of recommendation that I wrote?

Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 14:07     Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
The most equitable thing, though, is to teach every kid at a level appropriate for that kid's intelligence and current abilities. It is not fair or equitable to refuse to teach a child at an appropriate level because that child's race is overrepresented in the advanced classes. Likewise, it makes no sense to pull a child up to a level higher than what is appropriate for that child, just to balance the races.

One important thing that should be asked, though, is why gen ed programs are largely failing to provide appropriate education for their advanced learners. My oldest went through gen ed, and while this child has consistently tested at the capped DRA and has consistently had perfect scores on the reading SOL, my child was not able to receive above grade level language arts instruction. The school's excuse was that they didn't have enough advanced kids to offer an above grade level reading group, so instead my child had to be pulled down to a lower level. I didn't push the issue, since my child's reading group only met with the teacher for 15 minutes/week, and spent the other 485 minutes "working independently."

People would be less obsessed with AAP if gen ed had advanced math starting in 3rd, above grade level reading groups for all who quality, and enough reading group facetime with the teacher to even count as being educated and not educating yourself during that time.
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 13:55     Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Since some people might have missed it, here is a link to the AAP equity report:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BPD4M50C2B1F/$file/FCPS%20final%20report%2005.05.20.pdf

If you scroll down to page 66, you can see average CogAT and NNAT scores of LIV eligible kids broken down by race. It's very enlightening. For the kids who got accepted to AAP - CogAT Q score: Asian mean = 130.95. AA mean: 119.8 Hispanic mean: 118.9


I believe that the report addresses some of that as well. Part of that gap is explained by a gap in enrichment opportunities. Kids who have been read to, speak the language natively, attend enrichment classes or programs (tutoring or robotics or coding club) are likely to score better on those types of tests. we can kvetch all we want about them being IQ tests but additional education and stimulation are going to improve scores on tests like the NNAT, CogAT, and yes, even the WISC.


But why are race and SES being correlated so strongly? There are plenty of upper middle class black and hispanic kids who receive a lot of enrichment. There are also poorer white and Asian kids who don't. I would agree with most of your points and most of the ones in the equity report if they focused purely on SES and not race. FARMS kids and lower middle class kids are going to be disadvantaged, regardless of the child's race.
Anonymous
Post 07/29/2020 13:54     Subject: FCPS Appeals decision are out
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Since some people might have missed it, here is a link to the AAP equity report:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BPD4M50C2B1F/$file/FCPS%20final%20report%2005.05.20.pdf

If you scroll down to page 66, you can see average CogAT and NNAT scores of LIV eligible kids broken down by race. It's very enlightening. For the kids who got accepted to AAP - CogAT Q score: Asian mean = 130.95. AA mean: 119.8 Hispanic mean: 118.9


I believe that the report addresses some of that as well. Part of that gap is explained by a gap in enrichment opportunities. Kids who have been read to, speak the language natively, attend enrichment classes or programs (tutoring or robotics or coding club) are likely to score better on those types of tests. we can kvetch all we want about them being IQ tests but additional education and stimulation are going to improve scores on tests like the NNAT, CogAT, and yes, even the WISC.

They also presented some good solutions. Every school should have a full time AART. This would bolster level II and Level III programs at schools. With better Level III programs, there would be less pressure to get a kid who is strong in math but on grade level in LA or strong in LA and on grade level on math into AAP to make sure that the child's strong area receives the attention it deserves.

They also suggested that each school should have its own AAP program and determinations for entrance should be made based on the individual schools population. So schools with highly involved parents invested in enrichment programs will end up with a program that looks different then the Title 1 schools. That would also address a lot of the issues with diversity.

Finally, they recommend not allowing parents to submit additional material, including WISCs, and doing away with appeals. Mainly because there is a real bias towards who is likely to include additional materials and appeal.

The reality is that committee members know how test scores can be increased through enrichment. My son was at an advantage because he did robotics and coding club and chess club after school. It wasn't a math program but it still teaches logical thinking and engineering and mathematical concepts in a fun way. The kid at a Title 1 school was far less likely to even have those programs offered, nevermind joining those programs.

While I have no doubt that the kids scoring in the 140's on the WISC are very smart, I am not going to pretend that families that can afford the WISC have not been providing enrichment which is going to influence how their child does on the WISC. And the kid who is at a Title 1 school who scores a 118 on the CogAT could probably score a good deal higher if they had been as exposed to math and English concepts through their home environment and enrichment programs.

And that is why the committee does not weigh the test scores as highly as you all wish that they would.

AAP needs to be changed but I am not sure that everyone here would be thrilled if the change is that only 10% per grade level is placed in a school based AAP. Because I suspect that how ever they adjust the application process, the competition at the non Title 1 schools will become even greater then it is now. And I doubt too many of you would want to move to the areas with the Title 1 schools to insure that your kid is in AAP.


Agreeably, there are many more opportunities in nicer neighborhoods, wealthier areas. Just go to Mclean! Parents have no issue paying whatever because they can. But what about the kids who score high just because? They may live in a wealthy district and be Asian. But why ASSUME they were prepped? And also, Cogat classes are publicly EVERYWHERE. You can buy books right on Amazon. There are virtual classes, in person classes etc. It is obviously out there. Same with the NNATS. So they would literally need to ban these businesses to stop kids from taking these classes because TONS of AAP kids are taking them. And parents also think, we can afford it, and when others are prepping, why should my kid be left behind? If people can afford it, they will try to give that leg up but I don’t think that is for the AAP Board to decide what the child did and didn’t do. I understand LOWERING the standard for certain groups due to a lack of opportunities. But I do NOT understand RAISING the standard for Asian Americans, for example. This is not fair to the kids who work hard and score well.