Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it's a troll - I know of a kid with near perfect scores and straight 4's but lousy HOPE who got rejected. It makes zero sense.

Maybe someone will step in and explain then. On this board in the past there have been really occasional high CogATs that didn't get in, but nothing like this year.

This is what I got from our AART teacher when I ask why DS got rejected with the perfect score
We use a holistic approach to screening all files, the ability tests and iReady testing are a minimal factor in the screening process, approximately 1/5 of the total weight of what is screened. Students are compared to their peers of similar age, background and experience.

What information about background and experience does FCPS use?

The selection committee can only rely on the AAP package, the test score are only 1 page. there are HOPE scores, parent referral cover letter, parent referral questionnaire, school work sample and home work sample.

The school work sample closes tracks the 9 creative thinking strategies https://www.fcps.edu/academics/elementary/advanced-academic-programs/critical-and-creative-thinking
This is the most stuff our AART talk about during seminars. Ignore it at your own risk. Out of four school samples, only 1 sheet is (simple) math problem, the other 3 are somehow all demonstrating the thinking strategies, the reflection, the changing POV, the analogy etc.

So maybe that AART's 1/5 number is just randomly made up, but I believe most of the time selection committee is spending on the work samples and teacher/parent reviews, it only takes 30 second to glance at those test scores.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it's a troll - I know of a kid with near perfect scores and straight 4's but lousy HOPE who got rejected. It makes zero sense.

Maybe someone will step in and explain then. On this board in the past there have been really occasional high CogATs that didn't get in, but nothing like this year.

This is what I got from our AART teacher when I ask why DS got rejected with the perfect score
We use a holistic approach to screening all files, the ability tests and iReady testing are a minimal factor in the screening process, approximately 1/5 of the total weight of what is screened. Students are compared to their peers of similar age, background and experience.

What information about background and experience does FCPS use?

on a student file, there are three background related data fields: student's race, language spoken at home, free/reduced lunch enrollment

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it's a troll - I know of a kid with near perfect scores and straight 4's but lousy HOPE who got rejected. It makes zero sense.

Maybe someone will step in and explain then. On this board in the past there have been really occasional high CogATs that didn't get in, but nothing like this year.

Ever since the equity report was released and the county moved to local norms, they keep changing the criteria and I’m not sure any of the individuals charged with reviewing the portfolios have the same idea of what exactly they’re looking for anymore. It really just depends on who is looking at the portfolio and what they think eligible looks like. There was far more consistency in qualifiers prior to this move to local norms and now the whole process is a bit of a disaster.

My middle kid got in the year they moved to local norms so I was on the board then. I don't remember it being like this. Nor with my oldest before local norms.

My youngest got in last year and it was definitely like this. My oldest is in 6th and went through this process prior to local norms and it was a very different, much clearer set of criteria.

Maybe they still had a criteria hang-over the year of the switch, and it was last year things went sideways.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it's a troll - I know of a kid with near perfect scores and straight 4's but lousy HOPE who got rejected. It makes zero sense.

Maybe someone will step in and explain then. On this board in the past there have been really occasional high CogATs that didn't get in, but nothing like this year.

Ever since the equity report was released and the county moved to local norms, they keep changing the criteria and I’m not sure any of the individuals charged with reviewing the portfolios have the same idea of what exactly they’re looking for anymore. It really just depends on who is looking at the portfolio and what they think eligible looks like. There was far more consistency in qualifiers prior to this move to local norms and now the whole process is a bit of a disaster.

My middle kid got in the year they moved to local norms so I was on the board then. I don't remember it being like this. Nor with my oldest before local norms.

My youngest got in last year and it was definitely like this. My oldest is in 6th and went through this process prior to local norms and it was a very different, much clearer set of criteria.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it's a troll - I know of a kid with near perfect scores and straight 4's but lousy HOPE who got rejected. It makes zero sense.

Maybe someone will step in and explain then. On this board in the past there have been really occasional high CogATs that didn't get in, but nothing like this year.

This is what I got from our AART teacher when I ask why DS got rejected with the perfect score
We use a holistic approach to screening all files, the ability tests and iReady testing are a minimal factor in the screening process, approximately 1/5 of the total weight of what is screened. Students are compared to their peers of similar age, background and experience.

What information about background and experience does FCPS use?

Just a comment on the HOPE form:

Just below the 11 factors rating, there is another box saying: please indicate areas the child shows exceptional talent beyond their peers.

I noticed that there are huge differences in ratings giving out, some have mostly always, and my child at best got an often.

However, my child's lower box says he shows talent in Math, Reading and Writing.

I wonder if the second box is more important. No matter the child got how many always or often, if the second box shows multiple areas of talent above his/her peers, it seems it would indicates AAP?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it's a troll - I know of a kid with near perfect scores and straight 4's but lousy HOPE who got rejected. It makes zero sense.

Maybe someone will step in and explain then. On this board in the past there have been really occasional high CogATs that didn't get in, but nothing like this year.

This is what I got from our AART teacher when I ask why DS got rejected with the perfect score
We use a holistic approach to screening all files, the ability tests and iReady testing are a minimal factor in the screening process, approximately 1/5 of the total weight of what is screened. Students are compared to their peers of similar age, background and experience.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it's a troll - I know of a kid with near perfect scores and straight 4's but lousy HOPE who got rejected. It makes zero sense.

Maybe someone will step in and explain then. On this board in the past there have been really occasional high CogATs that didn't get in, but nothing like this year.

Ever since the equity report was released and the county moved to local norms, they keep changing the criteria and I’m not sure any of the individuals charged with reviewing the portfolios have the same idea of what exactly they’re looking for anymore. It really just depends on who is looking at the portfolio and what they think eligible looks like. There was far more consistency in qualifiers prior to this move to local norms and now the whole process is a bit of a disaster.

My middle kid got in the year they moved to local norms so I was on the board then. I don't remember it being like this. Nor with my oldest before local norms.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it's a troll - I know of a kid with near perfect scores and straight 4's but lousy HOPE who got rejected. It makes zero sense.

Maybe someone will step in and explain then. On this board in the past there have been really occasional high CogATs that didn't get in, but nothing like this year.

Ever since the equity report was released and the county moved to local norms, they keep changing the criteria and I’m not sure any of the individuals charged with reviewing the portfolios have the same idea of what exactly they’re looking for anymore. It really just depends on who is looking at the portfolio and what they think eligible looks like. There was far more consistency in qualifiers prior to this move to local norms and now the whole process is a bit of a disaster.

Anonymous wrote:They are not telling you th truth.

It is certainly possible that someone is just trying to get parents enraged about FCPS. Not sure how this gives someone pleasure, but this forum with all the anonymous posters has a lot more nastiness than other forums where a log-in is required. The log-ins still disguise the posters (e.g. Bogleheads), but it seems to rein in snarky-ness because most posters there are welcome and supportive and don't constantly belittle other forum members. That said, DCUM usually has a nugget of truth/timeliness that I can't find elsewhere. So here I am. And FCPS could be a lot more transparent about AAP (there's a thought) and that would put a damper on trolling if that's what it is. Give up the black box approach and send out a report of stats with all the test results, HOPE scores, demographics, base school, center school. Just blank out the student identities, and there you have it.

They are not telling you th truth.

My understanding from teachers is that in order to give a score in the always categories they had to provide concrete proof to back up the scores. It may be that a teacher didnt have documentation or examples to back it up for those categories

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it's a troll - I know of a kid with near perfect scores and straight 4's but lousy HOPE who got rejected. It makes zero sense.

Maybe someone will step in and explain then. On this board in the past there have been really occasional high CogATs that didn't get in, but nothing like this year.