Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would FCPS AAP have meetings like that with a professional medical association?

Because the AAP office had been tracking not only WISC scores but the tester/psychologist who provided the report. They found a high number of WISC scores from a specific tester.

Which tester? Last name starts with the letter...?

^This occurred a couple of years ago, just after the Fairfax version of the CogAT was used.

Anonymous wrote:Why would FCPS AAP have meetings like that with a professional medical association?

Because the AAP office had been tracking not only WISC scores but the tester/psychologist who provided the report. They found a high number of WISC scores from a specific tester.

Anonymous wrote:

17:15- are you saying that because one tester was discounted 6 years ago for doing this very thing that it is impossible for it to be going on now? I don't follow your logic.


I'm sure it can happen. But, it is by far the exceptionn. This is testing done by PhDs with professional licenses-- which they can lose for just this reason. You don't slip the tester $100 to get a high score like you slip the maitre D' a $20 to get a table. That's malpractice. They have too much to lose.

If it is the exception, why is FCPS meeting with the association and having them remind area psychologists about proper testing procedures?

Anonymous wrote:Not a falsehood. I know for a fact that a close friend got a wisc in mid 120s in first grade. Asked around, went to a different psych., paid roughly double, and got the 99% she paid for. She acknowledged this, and has since referred people to same psych.

Just because you know one student who went to one tester and didn't get a high score doesn't mean this practice isn't commonplace.

Please list the name of the two psychologists, if true. Let me guess...you won't.

Why would FCPS AAP have meetings like that with a professional medical association? I can't imagine these doctors need a hunch of elementary education teachers telling them how to do their jobs. Talk about the cart leading the horse! Has it become such a big problem that FCPS has had to intervene with the medical association re: impropriety??? This is ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:17:15- are you saying that because one tester was discounted 6 years ago for doing this very thing that it is impossible for it to be going on now? I don't follow your logic.

NP here -- a licensed psychologist would not risk their license by "throwing" test results.

how would anyone find out?

FCPS AAP office has already met with the northern Virginia psychologists association to share their findings regarding the number and type of testing results per area psychologists. The association then reminded their members about proper testing, procedures, etc. I would guess a psychologist would not risk losing his/her license.

Anonymous wrote:17:15- are you saying that because one tester was discounted 6 years ago for doing this very thing that it is impossible for it to be going on now? I don't follow your logic.

I'm sure it can happen. But, it is by far the exception. This is testing done by PhDs with professional licenses-- which they can lose for just this reason. You don't slip the tester $100 to get a high score like you slip the maitre D' a $20 to get a table. That's malpractice. They have too much to lose.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:17:15- are you saying that because one tester was discounted 6 years ago for doing this very thing that it is impossible for it to be going on now? I don't follow your logic.

NP here -- a licensed psychologist would not risk their license by "throwing" test results.

how would anyone find out?

Anonymous wrote:17:15- are you saying that because one tester was discounted 6 years ago for doing this very thing that it is impossible for it to be going on now? I don't follow your logic.

NP here -- a licensed psychologist would not risk their license by "throwing" test results.

17:15- are you saying that because one tester was discounted 6 years ago for doing this very thing that it is impossible for it to be going on now? I don't follow your logic.

I disagree. Especially with this years turn around times. If you couldn't afford to fork out for a wisc on your own, how would you possibly be able to get extra testing to appeal? The process for applying for the financial hardship takes longer than the window allows. Ridiculous. At least they aren't pretending anymore.

Anonymous wrote:Not a falsehood. I know for a fact that a close friend got a wisc in mid 120s in first grade. Asked around, went to a different psych., paid roughly double, and got the 99% she paid for. She acknowledged this, and has since referred people to same psych.

Just because you know one student who went to one tester and didn't get a high score doesn't mean this practice isn't commonplace.

-100. There was tester that FCPS was discounting/ not accepting about 6 years when DS qualified for AAP, for just this reason. But nobody is "handing out" high IQ scores in a pay to play type setup. A WISC has a +/-5 or margin of error, and kids scores are less set than an adults. So a kid with an actual 128 IQ could test as 124 the first time, and 132 the second time for perfectly legit reasons/ testing variations. And your friend had to wait a year between tests for it to be a valid test, which can also make a difference. But nobody is bribing their way into AAP-- and you look ridiculous saying otherwise. The reason Larla is in AAP and your kid isn't is not that Lar-mom and Lar-dad were willing to pay a bribe, but you are above such things.

Are there kids who are square-peg-into-round-hole forced into AAP thanks to parents who find any way $$$ to do it? Likely so, as this entire area has parents with that mindset, from school placement to The Right Sports Team.

But it is NOT the majority.

There are also kids in AAP who are highly gifted, and "truly" belong there.

Not a falsehood. I know for a fact that a close friend got a wisc in mid 120s in first grade. Asked around, went to a different psych., paid roughly double, and got the 99% she paid for. She acknowledged this, and has since referred people to same psych.

Just because you know one student who went to one tester and didn't get a high score doesn't mean this practice isn't commonplace.