Anonymous wrote:
Is ADD really a reason to keep a child out of the program?

No, and there are lots of twice exceptional kids in AAP Centers. My DC is one of them.

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know what sort of WISC scores are considered "good" for an appeal? Is it still at least a 130 that you're aiming for or does it need to be higher?

DD had 142 and was accepted despite Cogat and NNAT below the cutoff (that is she was a parent referral)

I have no proof but there definitely seem to be kids with ADD and attention disorders in DC's AAP center classes. Plus at least one of the kids I know that got in this year has an IEP for several issues. And I'm guessing plenty of GT kids are big daydreamers as well.

Anonymous wrote:
Great post! I wonder if the Committee thinks DD has ADD/ADHD since there is a 25+ point spread in the scores--DD has a 32 point difference. I've read on the internet that this doesn't mean the child has ADD/ADHD, just a "red flag." Maybe the Committee views it the same way?

Is ADD really a reason to keep a child out of the program? Although she is only in second grade, I am just waiting for someone to suggest that my DD has ADD. She gets great grades, but her biggest problem is that she has a hard time finishing work in class on her own. She gets easily distracted and will just start day dreaming when she should be working. You know the joke about the ADD person talking and then interrupting themselves to say, 'Oh look! A shiny thing!' Yeah, that is totally my girl. As I said, she makes O's in all of her areas of study, but she has solid N's in "using time wisely' and 'finishing assignments in class' (or however that is worded). I would imagine that the committee, if they bothered to look at her report card, would notice that. I will say that none of it reflected in her test scores. I can't remember what they were, but they were not spread out. That being said, she might have had a perfect score on one part if she hadn't started daydreaming and missed answering a couple of questions completely! We didn't submit any other information with the packet. As a matter of fact, I completely forgot to even turn in the Parent Questionaire (Yes, I know that was silly) and she still got in. It is possible that her teacher didn't mention her fondness for the wandering mind as she seems to think it has more to do with her being bored than being ADD.

Anyway, from what I have read, it is not uncommon for kids with a wide range of 'issues' to be considered GT, so I'm not sure why AAD would make a difference. This isn't a knock on the post that I quoted, but I am genuinely interested in why ADD would matter more than any other issue.

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know what sort of WISC scores are considered "good" for an appeal? Is it still at least a 130 that you're aiming for or does it need to be higher?

Having personal experience (DD had 138) and several other parents I know in the 130s--all rejected. One parent I know DD had 148 and got in. Hope this helps

Does anyone know what sort of WISC scores are considered "good" for an appeal? Is it still at least a 130 that you're aiming for or does it need to be higher?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just came across this forum. We received info from DD's (2nd grader) school that she is not eligible for GT.
She was in the GT screening pool and her scores were 116(NNAT), CogAT (Verbal - 116, Quantitative - 119, Non-verbal - 147, Composite - 133).

I wanted to add something - my child along with some of her classmates were moved to a new class with a more experienced teacher (this is a new FCPS school). After talking with some other parents of kids who were in the GT screening pool in the same class(with great scores), I was able to find out that none of them qualified. Most had a low GBRS. I hadn't put any effort in building a "great" relation with the new classteacher or AART this year so I guess that's what showed in the GBRS score (inferred from a poster's comments earlier). Some of the kids in the previous class who didn't have good scores did qualify for the GT center admission.

Great post! I wonder if the Committee thinks DD has ADD/ADHD since there is a 25+ point spread in the scores--DD has a 32 point difference. I've read on the internet that this doesn't mean the child has ADD/ADHD, just a "red flag." Maybe the Committee views it the same way?

Well my daughter had similar scores with even more of a spread - 106 verbal and 146 quantitative and she got in. I did not see the GBRS for her. (As a side note I do not see anything ADHD about her - never have, never considered it, and would be the furthest thing from my radar about this child. No one else has ever mentioned it either. She did have a terrible sneezing cold the day of the verbal so that may explain it).

Regardless, if I was the parent of the child who didn't get in I would definitely do WISC scores. If the scores are good, it seems like they have a good chance of getting in on appeal.

Anonymous wrote:I just came across this forum. We received info from DD's (2nd grader) school that she is not eligible for GT.
She was in the GT screening pool and her scores were 116(NNAT), CogAT (Verbal - 116, Quantitative - 119, Non-verbal - 147, Composite - 133).

I wanted to add something - my child along with some of her classmates were moved to a new class with a more experienced teacher (this is a new FCPS school). After talking with some other parents of kids who were in the GT screening pool in the same class(with great scores), I was able to find out that none of them qualified. Most had a low GBRS. I hadn't put any effort in building a "great" relation with the new classteacher or AART this year so I guess that's what showed in the GBRS score (inferred from a poster's comments earlier). Some of the kids in the previous class who didn't have good scores did qualify for the GT center admission.

Great post! I wonder if the Committee thinks DD has ADD/ADHD since there is a 25+ point spread in the scores--DD has a 32 point difference. I've read on the internet that this doesn't mean the child has ADD/ADHD, just a "red flag." Maybe the Committee views it the same way?

I just came across this forum. We received info from DD's (2nd grader) school that she is not eligible for GT.
She was in the GT screening pool and her scores were 116(NNAT), CogAT (Verbal - 116, Quantitative - 119, Non-verbal - 147, Composite - 133).
I went and got her screening packet from school and saw that her GBRS rating was low (11), the comments were all good - leader, creative thinker etc etc. I am thinking this is why she didn't get in eventhough I wrote up a good case for her on the optional Parent/Guardian questionnaire along with work samples.
I did get an appt for the WISC-IV at GMU but don't know whether to put her through the test and whether its worthwhile to do an appeal since the GBRS will still be considered or wait for a CogAT retest in 3rd grade.

I wanted to add something - my child along with some of her classmates were moved to a new class with a more experienced teacher (this is a new FCPS school). After talking with some other parents of kids who were in the GT screening pool in the same class(with great scores), I was able to find out that none of them qualified. Most had a low GBRS. I hadn't put any effort in building a "great" relation with the new classteacher or AART this year so I guess that's what showed in the GBRS score (inferred from a poster's comments earlier). Some of the kids in the previous class who didn't have good scores did qualify for the GT center admission.

I just came across this forum. We received info from DD's (2nd grader) school that she is not eligible for GT.
She was in the GT screening pool and her scores were 116(NNAT), CogAT (Verbal - 116, Quantitative - 119, Non-verbal - 147, Composite - 133).
I went and got her screening packet from school and saw that her GBRS rating was low (11), the comments were all good - leader, creative thinker etc etc. I am thinking this is why she didn't get in eventhough I wrote up a good case for her on the optional Parent/Guardian questionnaire along with work samples.
I did get an appt for the WISC-IV at GMU but don't know whether to put her through the test and whether its worthwhile to do an appeal since the GBRS will still be considered or wait for a CogAT retest in 3rd grade.

We used GMU and our child liked the tester. Dc thought it was fun and asked to go back again.

We were told by our AART that they like GMU becuase they do all of the subtests, so the committee really gets a good idea of the child's strngths and weaknesses. I think they also see it as unbiased.

I did read on this board awhile back that the county does value GMU testing more because they find it more unbiased. But I have no idea whether this was just one parent's opinion or whether this person actually knew something about the GT process.

Does anybody know what the pros and cons are using private psychologists to give an individual test? Fairfax County recommends using George Mason. But GMU website says that their testers are graduate students. Will they know how to work with kids? Does FCPS value reports from GMU more than reports from a private psychologist? Thanks!

Anonymous wrote:THIS REPORT IS FULL OF GREAT INFORMATION! BUT, IT'S FROM 2006! ANY IDEAS ON WHERE TO FIND A CURRENT REPORT LIKE THIS? I'VE USED ALL THE SEARCH TOOLS AND CAN'T FIND ANYTHING MORE CURRENT. SURELY ONE MUST EXIST?

One does not exist. To request such statistics, your best bet is to contact the Advanced Academic Programs office, or contact your district School Board member.

Anonymous wrote:

Just because 10-12% of the FCPS second graders are found eligible for level 4 services doesn't necessarily mean that children with low scores (say below 97%) are allowed level 4 services.
.

No, not true at all. The 10-12% number is not the percentage of eligible students it is the percentage of students enrolled in GT level IV centers. In 2006 the total level IV center enrollment was 7,139 out 61,178 students (11.7%). Since 2006 the percentage has only increased.

In 2005, the average COGATs of students in GT was 119 verbal, 126 non-verbal, 121 quatitative and 129 for the NNAT which are all below 97%.

The GT center statistics can be found here

http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/board.nsf/39c6389c088be51585256e56000c1bf2/2b1b2b585a5d305e852570fb004f3f9f/$FILE/Gifted%20and%20Talented%20Center%20Program.pdf

THIS REPORT IS FULL OF GREAT INFORMATION! BUT, IT'S FROM 2006! ANY IDEAS ON WHERE TO FIND A CURRENT REPORT LIKE THIS? I'VE USED ALL THE SEARCH TOOLS AND CAN'T FIND ANYTHING MORE CURRENT. SURELY ONE MUST EXIST?