Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It makes no sense to me. My only kid who i felt was way more gifted than my other 2 who were designated gifted by mcps was found not gifted by mcps. I don’t know what’s going on. Based on some assessment on which he scored 4 but MAP was 99 percentile he did not meet the gifted criteria. Something is fishy here. What are these assessments? Is it because of a teacher shortage that they are doing this? Moreover, my kid has been above grade in reading throughout and yet it says his reading level is on grade level on the letter I received. It makes no sense. Someone is lying here..

The assessments are the county-designated 2nd Quarter assessments in Benchmark and Eureka. Although I do not really know, I would not be surprised if MCPS did not tell teachers that they were using this particular assessment for G/T designation, so teachers did not know at the time they administered it that it counted for anything other than a grade in the class. Very easily, it could be a situation in which a 4 is an A and 5 something extraordinary and most teachers do not use the 5. In my experience line teachers are woefully uninformed about the G/T process and ramifications of their grading decisions.

+ a million. I don’t have intel, but a similar thing happened to us with mcps. Maddening.

That would explain a lot!

Anonymous wrote:It makes no sense to me. My only kid who i felt was way more gifted than my other 2 who were designated gifted by mcps was found not gifted by mcps. I don’t know what’s going on. Based on some assessment on which he scored 4 but MAP was 99 percentile he did not meet the gifted criteria. Something is fishy here. What are these assessments? Is it because of a teacher shortage that they are doing this? Moreover, my kid has been above grade in reading throughout and yet it says his reading level is on grade level on the letter I received. It makes no sense. Someone is lying here..

Go straight to accusing someone of lying when you don't understand. OK.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But does the designation have any practical impact? DC “meets the criteria” but does not seem to be offered anything beyond opportunities for enrichment/ acceleration - which I think he (and some other classmates) were already getting in 2nd grade…?

Wouldn’t you be confused if your straight A, 99th percentile child was getting enrichment now and was recommended for no enrichment for next year?

That's the part that also confused me. Basically the recommendation seem to be on grade level with enrichment within grade level curriculum using tiered support provided or some similar language ( I don't have the letter on front of me). Is this what they were getting in 2nd grade already (we had pull out groups this year) or these are within class small groups?

Also anyone know how to request a rescreening? I somehow thought the rescreening even if requested will not happen until next year? Or is that totally off? We are all new to this and normally would leave it be, as G&T designation doesn't have much meaning from what I can gather. But our child needs the enrichment to be engaged, so it may be time to advocate for them... Thanks in advance to anyone who can provide insights to this!

But why a rescreening? As far as I can tell, kids who are designated G&T are only getting grade-level enrichment. (Ie, the same as what they seemed to be getting in 2nd), so what’s the point?

We only got the not meeting the criteria letter (child held back due to EOL district assessment)*. And that letter does say "on grade level with enrichment" for reading (which still boggles my mind for a kid that reads at middle school level but oh well- but I guess it means grade-level enrichment?), while for math only "on grade level" then a separate para underneath which I am having a hard time deciphering. Now if those identified as G&T also get a similar verbiage, fine I won't bother with the rescreening (I could not care less about the designation itself). My worry is if this means they won't get enrichment in math, which they need to be engaged (the pull out math groups in second grade were the highlight for my child, as they had a more challenging but also fun curriculum from the snippets we heard).

*I understand now EOL was the end MP2 assessments of Eureka and Benchmark Reading. It makes now more sense that my child got a 4 on those rather than the required 5, since they were going through some transitions and were not engaged at school (that was also when we decided to get them evaluated).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It makes no sense to me. My only kid who i felt was way more gifted than my other 2 who were designated gifted by mcps was found not gifted by mcps. I don’t know what’s going on. Based on some assessment on which he scored 4 but MAP was 99 percentile he did not meet the gifted criteria. Something is fishy here. What are these assessments? Is it because of a teacher shortage that they are doing this? Moreover, my kid has been above grade in reading throughout and yet it says his reading level is on grade level on the letter I received. It makes no sense. Someone is lying here..

The assessments are the county-designated 2nd Quarter assessments in Benchmark and Eureka. Although I do not really know, I would not be surprised if MCPS did not tell teachers that they were using this particular assessment for G/T designation, so teachers did not know at the time they administered it that it counted for anything other than a grade in the class. Very easily, it could be a situation in which a 4 is an A and 5 something extraordinary and most teachers do not use the 5. In my experience line teachers are woefully uninformed about the G/T process and ramifications of their grading decisions.

+ a million. I don’t have intel, but a similar thing happened to us with mcps. Maddening.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It makes no sense to me. My only kid who i felt was way more gifted than my other 2 who were designated gifted by mcps was found not gifted by mcps. I don’t know what’s going on. Based on some assessment on which he scored 4 but MAP was 99 percentile he did not meet the gifted criteria. Something is fishy here. What are these assessments? Is it because of a teacher shortage that they are doing this? Moreover, my kid has been above grade in reading throughout and yet it says his reading level is on grade level on the letter I received. It makes no sense. Someone is lying here..

The assessments are the county-designated 2nd Quarter assessments in Benchmark and Eureka. Although I do not really know, I would not be surprised if MCPS did not tell teachers that they were using this particular assessment for G/T designation, so teachers did not know at the time they administered it that it counted for anything other than a grade in the class. Very easily, it could be a situation in which a 4 is an A and 5 something extraordinary and most teachers do not use the 5. In my experience line teachers are woefully uninformed about the G/T process and ramifications of their grading decisions.

I was wondering about this too. So far the teachers I’ve talked to seem perplexed by the whole thing.

Anonymous wrote:It makes no sense to me. My only kid who i felt was way more gifted than my other 2 who were designated gifted by mcps was found not gifted by mcps. I don’t know what’s going on. Based on some assessment on which he scored 4 but MAP was 99 percentile he did not meet the gifted criteria. Something is fishy here. What are these assessments? Is it because of a teacher shortage that they are doing this? Moreover, my kid has been above grade in reading throughout and yet it says his reading level is on grade level on the letter I received. It makes no sense. Someone is lying here..

Yep. Agree. We got 4s on whatever the EOLs are and my definitely-gifted kid is labeled as not gifted. Wtf.

I’m a former mcps 2nd grade teacher and by the old metrics 70+% of the class was always gifted in my W-cluster school. Curious how the rates are changing with this new system.

Anonymous wrote:It makes no sense to me. My only kid who i felt was way more gifted than my other 2 who were designated gifted by mcps was found not gifted by mcps. I don’t know what’s going on. Based on some assessment on which he scored 4 but MAP was 99 percentile he did not meet the gifted criteria. Something is fishy here. What are these assessments? Is it because of a teacher shortage that they are doing this? Moreover, my kid has been above grade in reading throughout and yet it says his reading level is on grade level on the letter I received. It makes no sense. Someone is lying here..

The assessments are the county-designated 2nd Quarter assessments in Benchmark and Eureka. Although I do not really know, I would not be surprised if MCPS did not tell teachers that they were using this particular assessment for G/T designation, so teachers did not know at the time they administered it that it counted for anything other than a grade in the class. Very easily, it could be a situation in which a 4 is an A and 5 something extraordinary and most teachers do not use the 5. In my experience line teachers are woefully uninformed about the G/T process and ramifications of their grading decisions.

It makes no sense to me. My only kid who i felt was way more gifted than my other 2 who were designated gifted by mcps was found not gifted by mcps. I don’t know what’s going on. Based on some assessment on which he scored 4 but MAP was 99 percentile he did not meet the gifted criteria. Something is fishy here. What are these assessments? Is it because of a teacher shortage that they are doing this? Moreover, my kid has been above grade in reading throughout and yet it says his reading level is on grade level on the letter I received. It makes no sense. Someone is lying here..

If you follow the link and look at 2nd Grade criteria, the EOL assessments are in 2nd Quarter. EOL stands for Evidence of Learning. There appear to be 2 EOL assessments in 2nd Quarter - Benchmark and Eureka, and the acceptable score is 5.

Is there math enrichment in third grade? My kid was tagged for reading enrichment but not math, although his math skills (and grades and scores) far outstrip his reading. He’s never had math enrichment despite scoring 99 percent plus since kindergarten and absorbing math concepts like a sponge. (His reading is good but not amazing and his writing is terrible.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But does the designation have any practical impact? DC “meets the criteria” but does not seem to be offered anything beyond opportunities for enrichment/ acceleration - which I think he (and some other classmates) were already getting in 2nd grade…?

Wouldn’t you be confused if your straight A, 99th percentile child was getting enrichment now and was recommended for no enrichment for next year?

That's the part that also confused me. Basically the recommendation seem to be on grade level with enrichment within grade level curriculum using tiered support provided or some similar language ( I don't have the letter on front of me). Is this what they were getting in 2nd grade already (we had pull out groups this year) or these are within class small groups?

Also anyone know how to request a rescreening? I somehow thought the rescreening even if requested will not happen until next year? Or is that totally off? We are all new to this and normally would leave it be, as G&T designation doesn't have much meaning from what I can gather. But our child needs the enrichment to be engaged, so it may be time to advocate for them... Thanks in advance to anyone who can provide insights to this!

But why a rescreening? As far as I can tell, kids who are designated G&T are only getting grade-level enrichment. (Ie, the same as what they seemed to be getting in 2nd), so what’s the point?

The behavior assessment is biased against reserved or shyer students. It asks questions like whether the student has a good sense of humor, how convincing they are, and if they respond to the needs of others.

The designation doesn’t have any practical application - it’s not a factor for the magnet lotteries. So that’s probably why you see some dismissive posters here.

It is confusing because there’s no transparency regarding the eol assessment, and there’s poor communication regarding what this designation entails. This is a problem.

Right if GT designation is meaningless for rising 3rd graders, why torture us with these letters the last week of school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But does the designation have any practical impact? DC “meets the criteria” but does not seem to be offered anything beyond opportunities for enrichment/ acceleration - which I think he (and some other classmates) were already getting in 2nd grade…?

Wouldn’t you be confused if your straight A, 99th percentile child was getting enrichment now and was recommended for no enrichment for next year?

That's the part that also confused me. Basically the recommendation seem to be on grade level with enrichment within grade level curriculum using tiered support provided or some similar language ( I don't have the letter on front of me). Is this what they were getting in 2nd grade already (we had pull out groups this year) or these are within class small groups?

Also anyone know how to request a rescreening? I somehow thought the rescreening even if requested will not happen until next year? Or is that totally off? We are all new to this and normally would leave it be, as G&T designation doesn't have much meaning from what I can gather. But our child needs the enrichment to be engaged, so it may be time to advocate for them... Thanks in advance to anyone who can provide insights to this!