Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How would you change the wording of the questions on the GBRS form so that they would be less culturally biased? Understanding that it is impossible to 100% avoid any cultural bias whatsoever, but how could it be better than it is now?

It is not about the wording but rather about who fills it out.

It is filled out by people who have had a different experience than the kids they serve. Look at that thread about how AAs have it tough with fcps hiring practices.

Human beings are biased and fallible and therefore imo Garson should have lesser import than it does currently. P. Not to mention you are comparing kids from different schools within the same app center or even different parts of the county. Does one really believe that the Gibran is effectively benchmarked so that one 14 means the same thing as another 14 the next school over? Or the next zip code over? Heck it doesn't mean the same thing in the same building because that kid - while sharing the same aart- would've likely had different K first and second grade teachers

Hmmm...but if you look at an AAP classroom at my kid's school, we have lots of diverse kids in it. In his class of 21 kids, there are girls, boys, Asian children, African American children, Indian children, a child with Asperger's, 2 with ADHD, Caucasian children, etc. So it isn't as if we're seeing these classes in our center school that are non-diverse. Lots of diverse kids are admitted, as they should be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How would you change the wording of the questions on the GBRS form so that they would be less culturally biased? Understanding that it is impossible to 100% avoid any cultural bias whatsoever, but how could it be better than it is now?

It is not about the wording but rather about who fills it out.

It is filled out by people who have had a different experience than the kids they serve. Look at that thread about how AAs have it tough with fcps hiring practices.

Human beings are biased and fallible and therefore imo Garson should have lesser import than it does currently. P. Not to mention you are comparing kids from different schools within the same app center or even different parts of the county. Does one really believe that the Gibran is effectively benchmarked so that one 14 means the same thing as another 14 the next school over? Or the next zip code over? Heck it doesn't mean the same thing in the same building because that kid - while sharing the same aart- would've likely had different K first and second grade teachers

Spellcheck. Those words were meant to be GBRS

Anonymous wrote:How would you change the wording of the questions on the GBRS form so that they would be less culturally biased? Understanding that it is impossible to 100% avoid any cultural bias whatsoever, but how could it be better than it is now?

It is not about the wording but rather about who fills it out.

It is filled out by people who have had a different experience than the kids they serve. Look at that thread about how AAs have it tough with fcps hiring practices.

Human beings are biased and fallible and therefore imo Garson should have lesser import than it does currently. P. Not to mention you are comparing kids from different schools within the same app center or even different parts of the county. Does one really believe that the Gibran is effectively benchmarked so that one 14 means the same thing as another 14 the next school over? Or the next zip code over? Heck it doesn't mean the same thing in the same building because that kid - while sharing the same aart- would've likely had different K first and second grade teachers

How would you change the wording of the questions on the GBRS form so that they would be less culturally biased? Understanding that it is impossible to 100% avoid any cultural bias whatsoever, but how could it be better than it is now?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many bitter psychos on here.

No one is saying the kid is Einstein - and thanks for the PPs who pointed out the name checked serial killer. How obsessed must one be with IQ scores to know that person's score?

Any rational person with kids in the FCPS system would quickly realize that AAP is designed for a top 15% (county-wide) student achievement population. 15% of the kids running around here are not Einsteins, but 15% of them are ready for above grade level work. That's the whole point of ADVANCED Academics.

And if you think a kid who scores in the 150s on the NNAT would not score above cut-off (132) on the CoGat then you are just not paying attention. Look at all the past years' threads about in/not in decisions and the public scores posted - while NNATs are typically higher than CoGat scores, there isn't a 20 point gap between the scores.

As to the GBRS, well it's culturally biased..

Please don't bite my head off. But if u look through the previous admission threads there are plenty of cases of children who met the benchmark on score bot not the other especially with a higher NNAT.

Also just curious how is the GBRS culturally biased?????

https://www.nagc.org/blog/racial-bias-gifted-and-talented-placement-and-what-do-about-it

http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/ny/2016/10/20/when-is-a-student-gifted-or-disabled-a-new-study-shows-racial-bias-plays-a-role-in-deciding/

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/01/why-are-there-so-few-black-children-in-gifted-and-talented-programs/424707/

I guess that explains the demographics for TJ....

Right - I don't think there are a lot of under represented minorities there.

Asians and Indian Americans have never been considered under represented minorities in education so their representation at TJ does not dispute that there is cultural bias among educator recommendations. I am so perplexed as to how people can be so dense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many bitter psychos on here.

No one is saying the kid is Einstein - and thanks for the PPs who pointed out the name checked serial killer. How obsessed must one be with IQ scores to know that person's score?

Any rational person with kids in the FCPS system would quickly realize that AAP is designed for a top 15% (county-wide) student achievement population. 15% of the kids running around here are not Einsteins, but 15% of them are ready for above grade level work. That's the whole point of ADVANCED Academics.

And if you think a kid who scores in the 150s on the NNAT would not score above cut-off (132) on the CoGat then you are just not paying attention. Look at all the past years' threads about in/not in decisions and the public scores posted - while NNATs are typically higher than CoGat scores, there isn't a 20 point gap between the scores.

As to the GBRS, well it's culturally biased..

Please don't bite my head off. But if u look through the previous admission threads there are plenty of cases of children who met the benchmark on score bot not the other especially with a higher NNAT.

Also just curious how is the GBRS culturally biased?????

https://www.nagc.org/blog/racial-bias-gifted-and-talented-placement-and-what-do-about-it

http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/ny/2016/10/20/when-is-a-student-gifted-or-disabled-a-new-study-shows-racial-bias-plays-a-role-in-deciding/

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/01/why-are-there-so-few-black-children-in-gifted-and-talented-programs/424707/

I guess that explains the demographics for TJ....

Right - I don't think there are a lot of under represented minorities there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many bitter psychos on here.

No one is saying the kid is Einstein - and thanks for the PPs who pointed out the name checked serial killer. How obsessed must one be with IQ scores to know that person's score?

Any rational person with kids in the FCPS system would quickly realize that AAP is designed for a top 15% (county-wide) student achievement population. 15% of the kids running around here are not Einsteins, but 15% of them are ready for above grade level work. That's the whole point of ADVANCED Academics.

And if you think a kid who scores in the 150s on the NNAT would not score above cut-off (132) on the CoGat then you are just not paying attention. Look at all the past years' threads about in/not in decisions and the public scores posted - while NNATs are typically higher than CoGat scores, there isn't a 20 point gap between the scores.

As to the GBRS, well it's culturally biased..

Please don't bite my head off. But if u look through the previous admission threads there are plenty of cases of children who met the benchmark on score bot not the other especially with a higher NNAT.

Also just curious how is the GBRS culturally biased?????

Won't bite your head off 'cause it's not appropriate for a legitimate response.

Posted above because that was just the sense I have from reading these threads and from personal experience.

Went back to look at the thread to see if my sense was backed up with the data.

I went through the first 10 pages of the 2017 AAP admission thread. Now granted the data is skewed because virtually all the posts are of scores that gain admission, but there were 29 data points in those 10 pages.

7 reports of NNAT being higher than CoGat with the average decrease in scores of 7 points (NNAT +7 over CoGat)

22 reports of CoGat being higher than NNAT with the average difference being about 12 (CoGat +12 over NNAT)

Lots of selection bias here of course (i.e. perhaps students who had lower NNATs perhaps had a parental focus on increasing the CoGat scores the following year - hence the 12 point increase - while students who had higher NNATs did not have the same parental focus - assuming that the kid will do fine on the CoGat - and therefore the drop in score was less).

So if the NNAT is higher than CoGat, based on this incomplete data, you're looking at a 7 point drop on average (if it does drop); I was being ultra conservative in saying 135 on the CoGat is probably the floor. Conservative because a 20 point drop is about 3x the average. And note that only 25% of this incomplete data had a score drop between NNAT and CoGat.

PPs who don't agree are disagreeing more out of pettiness than based on solid prior data.

As to the GBRS being culturally biased, I firmly believe that kids who exhibit typical middle/upper middle class behaviors and demeanors will get higher GBRS scores because they fit into the teachers' mental framework of a 'gifted' student. It's not just about the brown kids in the classroom, or the poor kids in the classroom. It's also about the kids with behavioral problems.

With Asian kids it's a two way street - on one hand the stereotypical mindset is that the Asian kid is gifted and therefore they will be viewed more kindly with that lens; on the other hand they may be expected to be gifted and therefore they would need to exhibit extraordinary behaviors to score highly on the GBRS, an expectation that is not required of other students.

If you look at the admissions thread, there isn't much correlation in many cases between naglieri, cogat and gbrs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many bitter psychos on here.

No one is saying the kid is Einstein - and thanks for the PPs who pointed out the name checked serial killer. How obsessed must one be with IQ scores to know that person's score?

Any rational person with kids in the FCPS system would quickly realize that AAP is designed for a top 15% (county-wide) student achievement population. 15% of the kids running around here are not Einsteins, but 15% of them are ready for above grade level work. That's the whole point of ADVANCED Academics.

And if you think a kid who scores in the 150s on the NNAT would not score above cut-off (132) on the CoGat then you are just not paying attention. Look at all the past years' threads about in/not in decisions and the public scores posted - while NNATs are typically higher than CoGat scores, there isn't a 20 point gap between the scores.

As to the GBRS, well it's culturally biased..

Please don't bite my head off. But if u look through the previous admission threads there are plenty of cases of children who met the benchmark on score bot not the other especially with a higher NNAT.

Also just curious how is the GBRS culturally biased?????

https://www.nagc.org/blog/racial-bias-gifted-and-talented-placement-and-what-do-about-it

http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/ny/2016/10/20/when-is-a-student-gifted-or-disabled-a-new-study-shows-racial-bias-plays-a-role-in-deciding/

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/01/why-are-there-so-few-black-children-in-gifted-and-talented-programs/424707/

I guess that explains the demographics for TJ....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many bitter psychos on here.

No one is saying the kid is Einstein - and thanks for the PPs who pointed out the name checked serial killer. How obsessed must one be with IQ scores to know that person's score?

Any rational person with kids in the FCPS system would quickly realize that AAP is designed for a top 15% (county-wide) student achievement population. 15% of the kids running around here are not Einsteins, but 15% of them are ready for above grade level work. That's the whole point of ADVANCED Academics.

And if you think a kid who scores in the 150s on the NNAT would not score above cut-off (132) on the CoGat then you are just not paying attention. Look at all the past years' threads about in/not in decisions and the public scores posted - while NNATs are typically higher than CoGat scores, there isn't a 20 point gap between the scores.

As to the GBRS, well it's culturally biased..

Please don't bite my head off. But if u look through the previous admission threads there are plenty of cases of children who met the benchmark on score bot not the other especially with a higher NNAT.

Also just curious how is the GBRS culturally biased?????

https://www.nagc.org/blog/racial-bias-gifted-and-talented-placement-and-what-do-about-it

http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/ny/2016/10/20/when-is-a-student-gifted-or-disabled-a-new-study-shows-racial-bias-plays-a-role-in-deciding/

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/01/why-are-there-so-few-black-children-in-gifted-and-talented-programs/424707/

Mine had a 105 on the NNAT but a 136 on the Cogat and he got in.

Don't worry! My child scored 119 on NNAT and had a high CogAt and got in.

Anonymous wrote:So many bitter psychos on here.[b]

No one is saying the kid is Einstein - and thanks for the PPs who pointed out the name checked serial killer. How obsessed must one be with IQ scores to know that person's score?

Any rational person with kids in the FCPS system would quickly realize that AAP is designed for a top 15% (county-wide) student achievement population. 15% of the kids running around here are not Einsteins, but 15% of them are ready for above grade level work. That's the whole point of ADVANCED Academics.

And if you think a kid who scores in the 150s on the NNAT would not score above cut-off (132) on the CoGat then you are just not paying attention. Look at all the past years' threads about in/not in decisions and the public scores posted - while NNATs are typically higher than CoGat scores, there isn't a 20 point gap between the scores.

As to the GBRS, well it's culturally biased..

Yes, yes, there are. Speaking of psychos, have you ever heard of the saying that is the pot calling the kettle black?

Anonymous wrote:wow y'all are bumming me out. I was so excited about our 133 score....

A 133 on the NNAT is a fabulous score! You shouldn't be bummed out!
--a mom with three kids in the program

Anonymous wrote:So many bitter psychos on here.

No one is saying the kid is Einstein - and thanks for the PPs who pointed out the name checked serial killer. How obsessed must one be with IQ scores to know that person's score?

Any rational person with kids in the FCPS system would quickly realize that AAP is designed for a top 15% (county-wide) student achievement population. 15% of the kids running around here are not Einsteins, but 15% of them are ready for above grade level work. That's the whole point of ADVANCED Academics.

And if you think a kid who scores in the 150s on the NNAT would not score above cut-off (132) on the CoGat then you are just not paying attention. Look at all the past years' threads about in/not in decisions and the public scores posted - while NNATs are typically higher than CoGat scores, there isn't a 20 point gap between the scores.

As to the GBRS, well it's culturally biased..

Please don't bite my head off. But if u look through the previous admission threads there are plenty of cases of children who met the benchmark on score bot not the other especially with a higher NNAT.

Also just curious how is the GBRS culturally biased?????