Anonymous wrote:It does prove they have the ability and potential to do well and thrive in AAP.

well then maybe you haven't read the state regs that were posted above:

"Gifted students" means those students in public elementary, middle, and secondary schools beginning with kindergarten through twelfth grade who demonstrate high levels of accomplishment or who show the potential for higher levels of accomplishment when compared to others of the same age, experience, or environment. Their aptitudes and potential for accomplishment are so outstanding that they require special programs to meet their educational needs. These students will be identified by professionally qualified persons through the use of multiple criteria as having potential or demonstrated aptitudes in one or more of the following areas:

see, that's the problem with all these opionions (and that is all they are) everyone seems to want to read into the AAP program what they want it to be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I doubt a 130 IQ is the top 2% of students in Fairfax. A 130 IQ child is bright but no usually so or so out of the norm that s/he can't happily learn in general ed. The dc who need AAP are usually much brighter.

It seems that in northern VA a 132 benchmark is met by about 10% according to NNAT cutoff. This year with FxAT, the top 5% of students (95 percentile benchmark) were selected, but in past years CogAT also captured top 10%. Add in say 5% more getting in on appeal with WISC, and you have the approximately 15% being found eligible. To me this makes sense. In other states about 10% are able to receive gifted services. With so many educated families in northern VA, I think it's good to have a higher % in AAP here than in gifted programs in some other places in the nation. Why should kids who would have been found eligible if they lived elsewhere be denied services just b/c they live here? Our population is really skewed. I don't think the level of gen ed is raised all that much by the kids at the top there since those who need more time to learn and have a different learning style still need to be accommodated. To me even 20% in AAP would be reasonable since again it is about 10% nationally.

+1

It does prove they have the ability and potential to do well and thrive in AAP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think the kids who got in the AAP are truly brighter than the kids with IQ 130 or above who are appealing?
There are so many false positives and false negatives in this AAP process. I think not letting a kid in with a high IQ because of a low GBRS that can be caused by bias or favoritism is a sad thing.

brighter? that's the criteria for admission? Brighter is as brighter does.

I think the argument is that given a different learning environment (AAP) the bright underachiever may begin to realize his or her potential. That is the stated goal of AAP, to nurture potential, not to reward what has already been achieved.

Anonymous wrote:I doubt a 130 IQ is the top 2% of students in Fairfax. A 130 IQ child is bright but no usually so or so out of the norm that s/he can't happily learn in general ed. The dc who need AAP are usually much brighter.

It seems that in northern VA a 132 benchmark is met by about 10% according to NNAT cutoff. This year with FxAT, the top 5% of students (95 percentile benchmark) were selected, but in past years CogAT also captured top 10%. Add in say 5% more getting in on appeal with WISC, and you have the approximately 15% being found eligible. To me this makes sense. In other states about 10% are able to receive gifted services. With so many educated families in northern VA, I think it's good to have a higher % in AAP here than in gifted programs in some other places in the nation. Why should kids who would have been found eligible if they lived elsewhere be denied services just b/c they live here? Our population is really skewed. I don't think the level of gen ed is raised all that much by the kids at the top there since those who need more time to learn and have a different learning style still need to be accommodated. To me even 20% in AAP would be reasonable since again it is about 10% nationally.

Anonymous wrote:Do you think the kids who got in the AAP are truly brighter than the kids with IQ 130 or above who are appealing?
There are so many false positives and false negatives in this AAP process. I think not letting a kid in with a high IQ because of a low GBRS that can be caused by bias or favoritism is a sad thing.

brighter? that's the criteria for admission? Brighter is as brighter does.

clearly a child with a high IQ is bright. a child with a high GBRS may not be bright, just liked by the teacher. i guess which would you rather have in the class?

I think though, most teachers try to be "objective" in coming up with the subjective GBRS number. I think the parameters might be a little faulty though. my child is clearly bright, high IQ, but very shy. hence a lower gbrs.

Anonymous wrote:Do you think the kids who got in the AAP are truly brighter than the kids with IQ 130 or above who are appealing?
There are so many false positives and false negatives in this AAP process. I think not letting a kid in with a high IQ because of a low GBRS that can be caused by bias or favoritism is a sad thing.

what does the high IQ prove though in terms of academic performance? It is the Adavanced Academic Program, not high IQ program.

Do you think the kids who got in the AAP are truly brighter than the kids with IQ 130 or above who are appealing?
There are so many false positives and false negatives in this AAP process. I think not letting a kid in with a high IQ because of a low GBRS that can be caused by bias or favoritism is a sad thing.

Anonymous wrote:Troll...kid with high NNAT, high GBRS, ok CogAT, and not in.

what were your DCs scores (not %)

who wish to portray this as the golden bullet for AAP admission.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really? The NNAT and CogAT are not iq gets, so unless the parents paid for the Wisc. the iq is actually unknown. Note, unlike the NNAT and CogAT, a 130 on the Wisc. is actually represented by only 2% of the population.

so why doesn't the state law or AAP guidelines say 130 IQ and you're in?

Have you read the state law?

It doesn't say 130 IQ and your in.

No, it doesn't. It also doesn't say that a single test score means a kid is in.

In case you would like to read the actual regulation:

http://leg1.state.va.us/000/reg/TOC08020.HTM#C0040

Ah ha! just as I suspected. A gifted student is one who has been identified as such by the selection committee. No mention of being a shoo-in with an IQ of 130 or above. Quite a blow methinks to the IQ testing lobby who wish to portray this the golden bullet for AAP admission.

Anonymous wrote:I doubt a 130 IQ is the top 2% of students in Fairfax. A 130 IQ child is bright but no usually so or so out of the norm that s/he can't happily learn in general ed. The dc who need AAP are usually much brighter.

true that. DC only got a 128 and is thriving in AAP. (seriously. Thriving).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really? The NNAT and CogAT are not iq gets, so unless the parents paid for the Wisc. the iq is actually unknown. Note, unlike the NNAT and CogAT, a 130 on the Wisc. is actually represented by only 2% of the population.

so why doesn't the state law or AAP guidelines say 130 IQ and you're in?

Have you read the state law?

It doesn't say 130 IQ and your in.

No, it doesn't. It also doesn't say that a single test score means a kid is in.

In case you would like to read the actual regulation:

http://leg1.state.va.us/000/reg/TOC08020.HTM#C0040

Anonymous wrote:second grade teacher in a center school. i would say that most everything i read here is wrong. about gbrs, wisc, cogat, and nnat. parents are so worried and other parents are so full of misinformation...

Great, someone who knows something! So stop the spread of misinformation--what's wrong on here?