Anonymous wrote:I requested and received my child's HOPE scores and they're terrible, which feels completely misaligned with her academics. Any advice on how to overcome this during the appeal process? I know HOPE weighs heavily into the committee decision making, so it's clear now why my kid didn't get in during initial review despite what seemed like decently high (though not off the charts) test performance.

Pyramid: Marshall
In/out of pool: In pool

Tests submitted by school in original packet
CogAt: 140 (138 Q, 139 NonV, 125 V)
NNAT: 129
Fall 2024 iReady math: 99th %ile (454, looks like just %ile submitted)
Fall 2023 iReady reading: 99th %ile (I don't see the raw score submitted/can't find the old paperwork; fall 2024 VALLS similarly high but not submitted by school/not really supposed to be used for this type of determination anyway)

WISC (not in original packet, done over spring break): 134

HOPE: 2 often, 5 sometimes, 4 rarely (!!!), no subjects checked/no comments.

I'm floored at the HOPE. It doesn't sound like my kid at all. The work samples weren't great (mostly because of terrible handwriting) but I had felt confident we could overcome those until I saw the HOPE. Now I'm also concerned about what's going on in that classroom, because I see my child exhibiting significantly above-grade-level talent in math and reading as part of our daily life, and if the teacher isn't seeing any of that, it feels like a huge problem (maybe my kid is totally checked out, maybe there's a behavior issue no one has mentioned, maybe a weird peer dynamic, could be any number of things that mean a completely different kid at home than at school, I suppose).

Any advice from people who have addressed a really bad HOPE during appeal through samples or the cover letter (or, if you were denied 2nd grade appeal, how to set up a conversation with 3rd grade teacher to make sure there isn't so much of a gulf between the at home and school experiences?).

Anonymous wrote:The HOPE scale was designed to find low income and culturally diverse students for gifted programs. If you read info about the HOPE Scale, the scores are either barely related to intelligence test scores, or slightly negatively related (see page 13). This is just a measurement that was designed to compare students of the same SES and ethnicity and then to find the higher intelligence students from each race or socioeconomic status.

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3-euw1-ap-pe-ws4-cws-documents.ri-prod/9781618214546/HOPE_Scale_Administrator_Manual_Part_1.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at that HOPE scale it kind of seems like it skews towards extroverted kids. Am I reading it right? It seems like if you have a shy, quiet kid that doesn't draw the teacher's attention, the HOPE scale is likely to be a dud for that kid? But that doesn't mean the kid isn't gifted (or more to the point of AAP, academically advanced). Can you not be shy and academically advanced at the same time? Does being quiet automatically negate the need for more challenge and depth of content?

In a classroom of 25+ kids, I can so easily imagine a quite, introverted, kid being overlooked by a teacher whose attention is more likely to go to the louder, extroverted kids. And this forum seems to have quite a lot of anecdotal evidence that kids with stellar test scores are being rejected due to the HOPE scale.

I do support the need to suss out some kids that don't test well but would benefit from more enrichment. But I don't understand why they would reject kids whose test scores are really high, merely because they didn't draw enough attention to themselves in a busy classroom.

(My younger girl just got in this year, and I don't know what her HOPE scores were. I'm afraid to bug the AART for her packet just yet, since we don't need to appeal or anything.)

1. First, don't hesitate to ask for that packet. It's not a big deal to email it to you. As the parent, you have a right to to the information. I got ours, and I think it will help me with younger siblings and also to coach DS in his weaker areas.
2. Second, while everything you say about HOPE seems logical, DS --who tries to stay under the radar so as not to attract attention--got a great HOPE. I suspect he's quiet but "helpful," well behaved and liked," definitely not at all extroverted. Maybe the teacher picked up on that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at that HOPE scale it kind of seems like it skews towards extroverted kids. Am I reading it right? It seems like if you have a shy, quiet kid that doesn't draw the teacher's attention, the HOPE scale is likely to be a dud for that kid? But that doesn't mean the kid isn't gifted (or more to the point of AAP, academically advanced). Can you not be shy and academically advanced at the same time? Does being quiet automatically negate the need for more challenge and depth of content?

In a classroom of 25+ kids, I can so easily imagine a quite, introverted, kid being overlooked by a teacher whose attention is more likely to go to the louder, extroverted kids. And this forum seems to have quite a lot of anecdotal evidence that kids with stellar test scores are being rejected due to the HOPE scale.

I do support the need to suss out some kids that don't test well but would benefit from more enrichment. But I don't understand why they would reject kids whose test scores are really high, merely because they didn't draw enough attention to themselves in a busy classroom.

(My younger girl just got in this year, and I don't know what her HOPE scores were. I'm afraid to bug the AART for her packet just yet, since we don't need to appeal or anything.)

These were exactly my thoughts when they debuted the HOPE last year. My youngest is our family's only extrovert and got in. My older 2 introverted kids, one of whom desperately NEEDED AAP and the other who was doing fine in the program, would have utterly bombed the majority of the HOPE scale.

IIRC, FCPS claimed they replaced the GBRS with the HOPE for racial/economic equity reasons.

You’re reading INCORRECTLY. The GBRS had no research behind it. It was just something FCPS created. The Hope Scale was developed at Purdue University and has undergone peer review.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at that HOPE scale it kind of seems like it skews towards extroverted kids. Am I reading it right? It seems like if you have a shy, quiet kid that doesn't draw the teacher's attention, the HOPE scale is likely to be a dud for that kid? But that doesn't mean the kid isn't gifted (or more to the point of AAP, academically advanced). Can you not be shy and academically advanced at the same time? Does being quiet automatically negate the need for more challenge and depth of content?

In a classroom of 25+ kids, I can so easily imagine a quite, introverted, kid being overlooked by a teacher whose attention is more likely to go to the louder, extroverted kids. And this forum seems to have quite a lot of anecdotal evidence that kids with stellar test scores are being rejected due to the HOPE scale.

I do support the need to suss out some kids that don't test well but would benefit from more enrichment. But I don't understand why they would reject kids whose test scores are really high, merely because they didn't draw enough attention to themselves in a busy classroom.

(My younger girl just got in this year, and I don't know what her HOPE scores were. I'm afraid to bug the AART for her packet just yet, since we don't need to appeal or anything.)

These were exactly my thoughts when they debuted the HOPE last year. My youngest is our family's only extrovert and got in. My older 2 introverted kids, one of whom desperately NEEDED AAP and the other who was doing fine in the program, would have utterly bombed the majority of the HOPE scale.

IIRC, FCPS claimed they replaced the GBRS with the HOPE for racial/economic equity reasons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at that HOPE scale it kind of seems like it skews towards extroverted kids. Am I reading it right? It seems like if you have a shy, quiet kid that doesn't draw the teacher's attention, the HOPE scale is likely to be a dud for that kid? But that doesn't mean the kid isn't gifted (or more to the point of AAP, academically advanced). Can you not be shy and academically advanced at the same time? Does being quiet automatically negate the need for more challenge and depth of content?

In a classroom of 25+ kids, I can so easily imagine a quite, introverted, kid being overlooked by a teacher whose attention is more likely to go to the louder, extroverted kids. And this forum seems to have quite a lot of anecdotal evidence that kids with stellar test scores are being rejected due to the HOPE scale.

I do support the need to suss out some kids that don't test well but would benefit from more enrichment. But I don't understand why they would reject kids whose test scores are really high, merely because they didn't draw enough attention to themselves in a busy classroom.

(My younger girl just got in this year, and I don't know what her HOPE scores were. I'm afraid to bug the AART for her packet just yet, since we don't need to appeal or anything.)

These were exactly my thoughts when they debuted the HOPE last year. My youngest is our family's only extrovert and got in. My older 2 introverted kids, one of whom desperately NEEDED AAP and the other who was doing fine in the program, would have utterly bombed the majority of the HOPE scale.

IIRC, FCPS claimed they replaced the GBRS with the HOPE for racial/economic equity reasons.

Anonymous wrote:Looking at that HOPE scale it kind of seems like it skews towards extroverted kids. Am I reading it right? It seems like if you have a shy, quiet kid that doesn't draw the teacher's attention, the HOPE scale is likely to be a dud for that kid? But that doesn't mean the kid isn't gifted (or more to the point of AAP, academically advanced). Can you not be shy and academically advanced at the same time? Does being quiet automatically negate the need for more challenge and depth of content?

In a classroom of 25+ kids, I can so easily imagine a quite, introverted, kid being overlooked by a teacher whose attention is more likely to go to the louder, extroverted kids. And this forum seems to have quite a lot of anecdotal evidence that kids with stellar test scores are being rejected due to the HOPE scale.

I do support the need to suss out some kids that don't test well but would benefit from more enrichment. But I don't understand why they would reject kids whose test scores are really high, merely because they didn't draw enough attention to themselves in a busy classroom.

(My younger girl just got in this year, and I don't know what her HOPE scores were. I'm afraid to bug the AART for her packet just yet, since we don't need to appeal or anything.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking at that HOPE scale it kind of seems like it skews towards extroverted kids. Am I reading it right? It seems like if you have a shy, quiet kid that doesn't draw the teacher's attention, the HOPE scale is likely to be a dud for that kid? But that doesn't mean the kid isn't gifted (or more to the point of AAP, academically advanced). Can you not be shy and academically advanced at the same time? Does being quiet automatically negate the need for more challenge and depth of content?

In a classroom of 25+ kids, I can so easily imagine a quite, introverted, kid being overlooked by a teacher whose attention is more likely to go to the louder, extroverted kids. And this forum seems to have quite a lot of anecdotal evidence that kids with stellar test scores are being rejected due to the HOPE scale.

I do support the need to suss out some kids that don't test well but would benefit from more enrichment. But I don't understand why they would reject kids whose test scores are really high, merely because they didn't draw enough attention to themselves in a busy classroom.

(My younger girl just got in this year, and I don't know what her HOPE scores were. I'm afraid to bug the AART for her packet just yet, since we don't need to appeal or anything.)

These were exactly my thoughts when they debuted the HOPE last year. My youngest is our family's only extrovert and got in. My older 2 introverted kids, one of whom desperately NEEDED AAP and the other who was doing fine in the program, would have utterly bombed the majority of the HOPE scale.

Anonymous wrote:Looking at that HOPE scale it kind of seems like it skews towards extroverted kids. Am I reading it right? It seems like if you have a shy, quiet kid that doesn't draw the teacher's attention, the HOPE scale is likely to be a dud for that kid? But that doesn't mean the kid isn't gifted (or more to the point of AAP, academically advanced). Can you not be shy and academically advanced at the same time? Does being quiet automatically negate the need for more challenge and depth of content?

In a classroom of 25+ kids, I can so easily imagine a quite, introverted, kid being overlooked by a teacher whose attention is more likely to go to the louder, extroverted kids. And this forum seems to have quite a lot of anecdotal evidence that kids with stellar test scores are being rejected due to the HOPE scale.

I do support the need to suss out some kids that don't test well but would benefit from more enrichment. But I don't understand why they would reject kids whose test scores are really high, merely because they didn't draw enough attention to themselves in a busy classroom.

(My younger girl just got in this year, and I don't know what her HOPE scores were. I'm afraid to bug the AART for her packet just yet, since we don't need to appeal or anything.)

Anonymous wrote:I requested and received my child's HOPE scores and they're terrible, which feels completely misaligned with her academics. Any advice on how to overcome this during the appeal process? I know HOPE weighs heavily into the committee decision making, so it's clear now why my kid didn't get in during initial review despite what seemed like decently high (though not off the charts) test performance.

Pyramid: Marshall
In/out of pool: In pool

Tests submitted by school in original packet
CogAt: 140 (138 Q, 139 NonV, 125 V)
NNAT: 129
Fall 2024 iReady math: 99th %ile (454, looks like just %ile submitted)
Fall 2023 iReady reading: 99th %ile (I don't see the raw score submitted/can't find the old paperwork; fall 2024 VALLS similarly high but not submitted by school/not really supposed to be used for this type of determination anyway)

WISC (not in original packet, done over spring break): 134

HOPE: 2 often, 5 sometimes, 4 rarely (!!!), no subjects checked/no comments.

I'm floored at the HOPE. It doesn't sound like my kid at all. The work samples weren't great (mostly because of terrible handwriting) but I had felt confident we could overcome those until I saw the HOPE. Now I'm also concerned about what's going on in that classroom, because I see my child exhibiting significantly above-grade-level talent in math and reading as part of our daily life, and if the teacher isn't seeing any of that, it feels like a huge problem (maybe my kid is totally checked out, maybe there's a behavior issue no one has mentioned, maybe a weird peer dynamic, could be any number of things that mean a completely different kid at home than at school, I suppose).

Any advice from people who have addressed a really bad HOPE during appeal through samples or the cover letter (or, if you were denied 2nd grade appeal, how to set up a conversation with 3rd grade teacher to make sure there isn't so much of a gulf between the at home and school experiences?).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all so absurd. A kid who is 99th percentile across the board should be a no brainer admit. They're both smarter and more advanced than the majority of kids in the program.

It won't help with the appeal, but I would do a conference with the teacher and perhaps the principal or AART. I'd go in with the premise that your child's ability and achievement levels are apparently not corresponding with what your child is doing in the classroom, and you're concerned that this is a red flag for something else. Then, see what the teacher has to say and go from there.

For the appeal, I'd think about any reason your child might not be displaying advanced behaviors in the classroom, and then use that as justification that your child cannot have their needs met in the regular classroom.

It’s not absurd.

FCPS specifically and consciously replaced the old GBRS score with the better HOPE scale.

And the HOPE scale is better because it’s intentionally inclusive of students with performing arts talents, students who show compassion towards others, students who show they are sensitive to larger or deeper issues of human concern, etc.

These evaluation factors were missing on the old GBRS.

Anonymous wrote:Kids can have high test scores and not be curious in class. The Teacher might be seeing a child who doesn’t do the extra work or read books above grade level during school. If the child is choosing to do only what is asked in class, then they might not look like a kid who needs something other than the regular class. The question to ask the teacher is what is your child like in class? Do they get up and do the extra work that is offered? Are they reading extra material to learn more about a subject? Are they finding ways to combine subject material in class?

I know that HOPE doesn’t have comments, my son had GBRSs. The comments focused on all the extra things he did and how he brought in information learned at home to school subjects. He had a friend with similar test scores whose parent told me that the GBRSs made it clear that their bright kid, and he is a bright kid, had no interest in doing anything extra in class. He did great in Advanced Math but asked regularly to drop into the regular math class. He wanted to stop LIII pullouts. Not because the class was too hard but because he knew the other group of kids didn’t do as much work. He decided on Math 7H instead of Algebra 1 H in 7th grade because he didn’t want the challenge. The difference wasn’t test scores or grades but curiosity displayed in class. He would have been fine in LIV but he was fine in the regular class.