Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To capture the greatest number of kids, the top 10% is defined as an "either/or", not as an "and". So if your kid was 10% on NNAT but not on COGAT, your kid will be in pool. Or if your kid was top 10% in COGAT but not NNAT, kid is still referred. Kids that are 10% in both are also captured in this manner.

I don't think this is correct. I think the pool is 10% of the 2nd grade class for each school.

The central committee is the same, though. They are supposedly comparing all student packets, in pool and referred, to each other. It has always been debate whether or not the central committee keeps the school in mind when making their decision.

Top 10% "in 2nd grade" means you're looking at both NNAT and COGAT and not just COGAT. The Universal Screener language (posted by someone else) clearly notes that both NNAT and COGAT are considered. NNAT from 1st grade and COGAT for 2nd grade. The 10% is inclusive of both tests and they use "either/or" for the threshold of top 10%. That's how it works.

The kids who are in pool are automatically properly screened by Central. The kids who are parent-referred go through a couple of other threshold criteria markers before getting fully screened. (Not publicly advertised.) The capacity at the school is absolutely considered, as with any program with the level of popularity that exists with LIV. That's just planning. AARTs give off a lot of *talking points* information they don't fully understand. <-- This is how it works!

Huh? Where do you get this information, because it flatly contradicts what I've heard over doing this 3 times, with 3 kids admitted, only 1 who was in-pool.

- By "central" do you mean the Central Office or the central screening committee? The AAP Central Office doesn't do the screening. Instead group of 6 teachers from every single elementary school and some middle schools in FCPS are the "central screening committee" and they do the screening. 4 of them say yes and your kid is in. Less than 4 and your kid is not. The Central Office's role in the central screening committee is training and organization.
- AARTs aren't giving uniformed "talking points." The are integral parts of the central screening committee every year and absolutely know how this process works.
- I have no idea what kind of "other threshhold criteria markers before getting fully screened" would even mean. If you are implying, like it sounds like, that parent referred kids don't get to go before the central selection committee unless they meet some other threshholds, FCPS's own website on the screening process flatly contradicts this. It states "Having a Grade 2 universal screener referral does not mean the student has an advantage or is screened differently." Plus what about school/teacher referred kids?

I think you are making junk up that is patently false to rile people up. Honestly the worst kind of trolling - just being mean for the sake of your own amusement.

Anyone who really wants to know how the process works can watch FCPS's own presentations on it, if you didn't go when your AART gave the level IV presentation. Very helpful stuff here. https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs#presentations-learn-about-advanced-academic-programs-and-services

Because everything FCPS puts on its website is patently true! Ok... since you had 3 kids going through this, you must know how it's run. Thank you!

I provided sources for my statements. You have not. What little birdie told you that parent referred kids had extra hoops to jump through?

Kirsten Maloney

And who are you, PP, that you have chats with the senior manager of AAP for FCPS?

Anonymous wrote:Here's another way to look at it:

FCPS has 144 elementary schools, with a 2nd grade population ranging from 40-50 for smaller elementary schools (300 student body) to about 140-150 (1000 student body). About 1/2 the kids were screened for LIV prior to 2019, more today because of the equity measures implemented. So if you run the numbers, you're looking at screening anywhere between 8,700 to over 11,000 kids. If you think your data is accurate, that's approximately 1,000 teachers reviewing close to a 1,000 student files. Sigh. I'm sure you can think of FCPS's efficiency marker when thinking through this more clearly and assuming what you read on FCPS website is disclosing all the nuances of their "holistic" process. If you have had 3 kids going through the process, I'd think you should be more aware than you are today. Some reading material for you, for when you have time to think through this more logically.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BPLQKV69B096/%24file/FCPS%20final%20report%2005.05.20.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To capture the greatest number of kids, the top 10% is defined as an "either/or", not as an "and". So if your kid was 10% on NNAT but not on COGAT, your kid will be in pool. Or if your kid was top 10% in COGAT but not NNAT, kid is still referred. Kids that are 10% in both are also captured in this manner.

I don't think this is correct. I think the pool is 10% of the 2nd grade class for each school.

The central committee is the same, though. They are supposedly comparing all student packets, in pool and referred, to each other. It has always been debate whether or not the central committee keeps the school in mind when making their decision.

Top 10% "in 2nd grade" means you're looking at both NNAT and COGAT and not just COGAT. The Universal Screener language (posted by someone else) clearly notes that both NNAT and COGAT are considered. NNAT from 1st grade and COGAT for 2nd grade. The 10% is inclusive of both tests and they use "either/or" for the threshold of top 10%. That's how it works.

The kids who are in pool are automatically properly screened by Central. The kids who are parent-referred go through a couple of other threshold criteria markers before getting fully screened. (Not publicly advertised.) The capacity at the school is absolutely considered, as with any program with the level of popularity that exists with LIV. That's just planning. AARTs give off a lot of *talking points* information they don't fully understand. <-- This is how it works!

Huh? Where do you get this information, because it flatly contradicts what I've heard over doing this 3 times, with 3 kids admitted, only 1 who was in-pool.

- By "central" do you mean the Central Office or the central screening committee? The AAP Central Office doesn't do the screening. Instead group of 6 teachers from every single elementary school and some middle schools in FCPS are the "central screening committee" and they do the screening. 4 of them say yes and your kid is in. Less than 4 and your kid is not. The Central Office's role in the central screening committee is training and organization.
- AARTs aren't giving uniformed "talking points." The are integral parts of the central screening committee every year and absolutely know how this process works.
- I have no idea what kind of "other threshhold criteria markers before getting fully screened" would even mean. If you are implying, like it sounds like, that parent referred kids don't get to go before the central selection committee unless they meet some other threshholds, FCPS's own website on the screening process flatly contradicts this. It states "Having a Grade 2 universal screener referral does not mean the student has an advantage or is screened differently." Plus what about school/teacher referred kids?

I think you are making junk up that is patently false to rile people up. Honestly the worst kind of trolling - just being mean for the sake of your own amusement.

Anyone who really wants to know how the process works can watch FCPS's own presentations on it, if you didn't go when your AART gave the level IV presentation. Very helpful stuff here. https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs#presentations-learn-about-advanced-academic-programs-and-services

Because everything FCPS puts on its website is patently true! Ok... since you had 3 kids going through this, you must know how it's run. Thank you!

I provided sources for my statements. You have not. What little birdie told you that parent referred kids had extra hoops to jump through?

Kirsten Maloney

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To capture the greatest number of kids, the top 10% is defined as an "either/or", not as an "and". So if your kid was 10% on NNAT but not on COGAT, your kid will be in pool. Or if your kid was top 10% in COGAT but not NNAT, kid is still referred. Kids that are 10% in both are also captured in this manner.

I don't think this is correct. I think the pool is 10% of the 2nd grade class for each school.

The central committee is the same, though. They are supposedly comparing all student packets, in pool and referred, to each other. It has always been debate whether or not the central committee keeps the school in mind when making their decision.

Top 10% "in 2nd grade" means you're looking at both NNAT and COGAT and not just COGAT. The Universal Screener language (posted by someone else) clearly notes that both NNAT and COGAT are considered. NNAT from 1st grade and COGAT for 2nd grade. The 10% is inclusive of both tests and they use "either/or" for the threshold of top 10%. That's how it works.

The kids who are in pool are automatically properly screened by Central. The kids who are parent-referred go through a couple of other threshold criteria markers before getting fully screened. (Not publicly advertised.) The capacity at the school is absolutely considered, as with any program with the level of popularity that exists with LIV. That's just planning. AARTs give off a lot of *talking points* information they don't fully understand. <-- This is how it works!

Huh? Where do you get this information, because it flatly contradicts what I've heard over doing this 3 times, with 3 kids admitted, only 1 who was in-pool.

- By "central" do you mean the Central Office or the central screening committee? The AAP Central Office doesn't do the screening. Instead group of 6 teachers from every single elementary school and some middle schools in FCPS are the "central screening committee" and they do the screening. 4 of them say yes and your kid is in. Less than 4 and your kid is not. The Central Office's role in the central screening committee is training and organization.
- AARTs aren't giving uniformed "talking points." The are integral parts of the central screening committee every year and absolutely know how this process works.
- I have no idea what kind of "other threshhold criteria markers before getting fully screened" would even mean. If you are implying, like it sounds like, that parent referred kids don't get to go before the central selection committee unless they meet some other threshholds, FCPS's own website on the screening process flatly contradicts this. It states "Having a Grade 2 universal screener referral does not mean the student has an advantage or is screened differently." Plus what about school/teacher referred kids?

I think you are making junk up that is patently false to rile people up. Honestly the worst kind of trolling - just being mean for the sake of your own amusement.

Anyone who really wants to know how the process works can watch FCPS's own presentations on it, if you didn't go when your AART gave the level IV presentation. Very helpful stuff here. https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs#presentations-learn-about-advanced-academic-programs-and-services

Because everything FCPS puts on its website is patently true! Ok... since you had 3 kids going through this, you must know how it's run. Thank you!

I provided sources for my statements. You have not. What little birdie told you that parent referred kids had extra hoops to jump through?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To capture the greatest number of kids, the top 10% is defined as an "either/or", not as an "and". So if your kid was 10% on NNAT but not on COGAT, your kid will be in pool. Or if your kid was top 10% in COGAT but not NNAT, kid is still referred. Kids that are 10% in both are also captured in this manner.

I don't think this is correct. I think the pool is 10% of the 2nd grade class for each school.

The central committee is the same, though. They are supposedly comparing all student packets, in pool and referred, to each other. It has always been debate whether or not the central committee keeps the school in mind when making their decision.

Top 10% "in 2nd grade" means you're looking at both NNAT and COGAT and not just COGAT. The Universal Screener language (posted by someone else) clearly notes that both NNAT and COGAT are considered. NNAT from 1st grade and COGAT for 2nd grade. The 10% is inclusive of both tests and they use "either/or" for the threshold of top 10%. That's how it works.

The kids who are in pool are automatically properly screened by Central. The kids who are parent-referred go through a couple of other threshold criteria markers before getting fully screened. (Not publicly advertised.) The capacity at the school is absolutely considered, as with any program with the level of popularity that exists with LIV. That's just planning. AARTs give off a lot of *talking points* information they don't fully understand. <-- This is how it works!

Huh? Where do you get this information, because it flatly contradicts what I've heard over doing this 3 times, with 3 kids admitted, only 1 who was in-pool.

- By "central" do you mean the Central Office or the central screening committee? The AAP Central Office doesn't do the screening. Instead group of 6 teachers from every single elementary school and some middle schools in FCPS are the "central screening committee" and they do the screening. 4 of them say yes and your kid is in. Less than 4 and your kid is not. The Central Office's role in the central screening committee is training and organization.
- AARTs aren't giving uniformed "talking points." The are integral parts of the central screening committee every year and absolutely know how this process works.
- I have no idea what kind of "other threshhold criteria markers before getting fully screened" would even mean. If you are implying, like it sounds like, that parent referred kids don't get to go before the central selection committee unless they meet some other threshholds, FCPS's own website on the screening process flatly contradicts this. It states "Having a Grade 2 universal screener referral does not mean the student has an advantage or is screened differently." Plus what about school/teacher referred kids?

I think you are making junk up that is patently false to rile people up. Honestly the worst kind of trolling - just being mean for the sake of your own amusement.

Anyone who really wants to know how the process works can watch FCPS's own presentations on it, if you didn't go when your AART gave the level IV presentation. Very helpful stuff here. https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs#presentations-learn-about-advanced-academic-programs-and-services

Because everything FCPS puts on its website is patently true! Ok... since you had 3 kids going through this, you must know how it's run. Thank you!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To capture the greatest number of kids, the top 10% is defined as an "either/or", not as an "and". So if your kid was 10% on NNAT but not on COGAT, your kid will be in pool. Or if your kid was top 10% in COGAT but not NNAT, kid is still referred. Kids that are 10% in both are also captured in this manner.

I don't think this is correct. I think the pool is 10% of the 2nd grade class for each school.

The central committee is the same, though. They are supposedly comparing all student packets, in pool and referred, to each other. It has always been debate whether or not the central committee keeps the school in mind when making their decision.

Top 10% "in 2nd grade" means you're looking at both NNAT and COGAT and not just COGAT. The Universal Screener language (posted by someone else) clearly notes that both NNAT and COGAT are considered. NNAT from 1st grade and COGAT for 2nd grade. The 10% is inclusive of both tests and they use "either/or" for the threshold of top 10%. That's how it works.

The kids who are in pool are automatically properly screened by Central. The kids who are parent-referred go through a couple of other threshold criteria markers before getting fully screened. (Not publicly advertised.) The capacity at the school is absolutely considered, as with any program with the level of popularity that exists with LIV. That's just planning. AARTs give off a lot of *talking points* information they don't fully understand. <-- This is how it works!

Huh? Where do you get this information, because it flatly contradicts what I've heard over doing this 3 times, with 3 kids admitted, only 1 who was in-pool.

- By "central" do you mean the Central Office or the central screening committee? The AAP Central Office doesn't do the screening. Instead group of 6 teachers from every single elementary school and some middle schools in FCPS are the "central screening committee" and they do the screening. 4 of them say yes and your kid is in. Less than 4 and your kid is not. The Central Office's role in the central screening committee is training and organization.
- AARTs aren't giving uniformed "talking points." The are integral parts of the central screening committee every year and absolutely know how this process works.
- I have no idea what kind of "other threshhold criteria markers before getting fully screened" would even mean. If you are implying, like it sounds like, that parent referred kids don't get to go before the central selection committee unless they meet some other threshholds, FCPS's own website on the screening process flatly contradicts this. It states "Having a Grade 2 universal screener referral does not mean the student has an advantage or is screened differently." Plus what about school/teacher referred kids?

I think you are making junk up that is patently false to rile people up. Honestly the worst kind of trolling - just being mean for the sake of your own amusement.

Anyone who really wants to know how the process works can watch FCPS's own presentations on it, if you didn't go when your AART gave the level IV presentation. Very helpful stuff here. https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs#presentations-learn-about-advanced-academic-programs-and-services

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To capture the greatest number of kids, the top 10% is defined as an "either/or", not as an "and". So if your kid was 10% on NNAT but not on COGAT, your kid will be in pool. Or if your kid was top 10% in COGAT but not NNAT, kid is still referred. Kids that are 10% in both are also captured in this manner.

I don't think this is correct. I think the pool is 10% of the 2nd grade class for each school.

The central committee is the same, though. They are supposedly comparing all student packets, in pool and referred, to each other. It has always been debate whether or not the central committee keeps the school in mind when making their decision.

Top 10% "in 2nd grade" means you're looking at both NNAT and COGAT and not just COGAT. The Universal Screener language (posted by someone else) clearly notes that both NNAT and COGAT are considered. NNAT from 1st grade and COGAT for 2nd grade. The 10% is inclusive of both tests and they use "either/or" for the threshold of top 10%. That's how it works.

The kids who are in pool are automatically properly screened by Central. The kids who are parent-referred go through a couple of other threshold criteria markers before getting fully screened. (Not publicly advertised.) The capacity at the school is absolutely considered, as with any program with the level of popularity that exists with LIV. That's just planning. AARTs give off a lot of *talking points* information they don't fully understand. <-- This is how it works!

Anonymous wrote:To capture the greatest number of kids, the top 10% is defined as an "either/or", not as an "and". So if your kid was 10% on NNAT but not on COGAT, your kid will be in pool. Or if your kid was top 10% in COGAT but not NNAT, kid is still referred. Kids that are 10% in both are also captured in this manner.

Anonymous wrote:Last year, the pool letters were emailed the Friday before winter break.