Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The problem is that tests are taken on one, or at most a few days. It is possible to prep children for tests so that they get higher scores than they would without prepping.

Teacher comments, on the other hand, are based on many, many days of first hand observation. Sometimes children's behaviors back up test scores, sometimes they don't. Kids who are not exhibiting "gifted" behaviors generally are capable of having their educational needs met in the regular classroom.

Looking at only test scores does not give a detailed enough picture of the child and his or her educational needs.

9:06 PP again. My kid scored 99th percentile on both cogat and wisc. That child was also way above grade level on iready, is in above grade level groups for all subjects, is grade skipped (in fcps) for one subject, and gets excellent grades. If that child ends up being given a low GBRS, that's more a reflection that the teacher is an idiot or the teacher just doesn't like my child than it is a reflection of my child's giftedness or educational needs. Judgement of whether a kid is exhibiting gifted behaviors is pretty arbitrary and shouldn't be the deciding factor. I'm fortunate, in that I have no reason to expect a low GBRS. We have seen on this forum, however, that many gifted children who are shy or those who are subject to weird teacher biases get low GBRS.

or are brown or black (which falls into the bias teachers show)

Anonymous wrote:A friend's son with highs scores, excellent grades, etc. didn't make it to LCPS gifted program. The teacher *hated* him. They're not helicopter parents, opting to let the child work things out, but in this case, they ended up having to intervene.

Applied from a private school?

A friend's son with highs scores, excellent grades, etc. didn't make it to LCPS gifted program. The teacher *hated* him. They're not helicopter parents, opting to let the child work things out, but in this case, they ended up having to intervene.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The problem is that tests are taken on one, or at most a few days. It is possible to prep children for tests so that they get higher scores than they would without prepping.

Teacher comments, on the other hand, are based on many, many days of first hand observation. Sometimes children's behaviors back up test scores, sometimes they don't. Kids who are not exhibiting "gifted" behaviors generally are capable of having their educational needs met in the regular classroom.

Looking at only test scores does not give a detailed enough picture of the child and his or her educational needs.

9:06 PP again. My kid scored 99th percentile on both cogat and wisc. That child was also way above grade level on iready, is in above grade level groups for all subjects, is grade skipped (in fcps) for one subject, and gets excellent grades. If that child ends up being given a low GBRS, that's more a reflection that the teacher is an idiot or the teacher just doesn't like my child than it is a reflection of my child's giftedness or educational needs. Judgement of whether a kid is exhibiting gifted behaviors is pretty arbitrary and shouldn't be the deciding factor. I'm fortunate, in that I have no reason to expect a low GBRS. We have seen on this forum, however, that many gifted children who are shy or those who are subject to weird teacher biases get low GBRS.

+1

Anonymous wrote:
The problem is that tests are taken on one, or at most a few days. It is possible to prep children for tests so that they get higher scores than they would without prepping.

Teacher comments, on the other hand, are based on many, many days of first hand observation. Sometimes children's behaviors back up test scores, sometimes they don't. Kids who are not exhibiting "gifted" behaviors generally are capable of having their educational needs met in the regular classroom.

Looking at only test scores does not give a detailed enough picture of the child and his or her educational needs.

9:06 PP again. My kid scored 99th percentile on both cogat and wisc. That child was also way above grade level on iready, is in above grade level groups for all subjects, is grade skipped (in fcps) for one subject, and gets excellent grades. If that child ends up being given a low GBRS, that's more a reflection that the teacher is an idiot or the teacher just doesn't like my child than it is a reflection of my child's giftedness or educational needs. Judgement of whether a kid is exhibiting gifted behaviors is pretty arbitrary and shouldn't be the deciding factor. I'm fortunate, in that I have no reason to expect a low GBRS. We have seen on this forum, however, that many gifted children who are shy or those who are subject to weird teacher biases get low GBRS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If both of the cases here are true, then the system truly is broken. The director was clearly grasping for a reason for rejection, which shows that they could pretty much justify rejecting any child for any reason. The only solution offered was to try again next year with essentially the same packet, which also means that the child really ought to have been selected this year.

Holistic reviews are fine and all, but they should be used to admit kids who otherwise didn't make the cut. They shouldn't be used as a vehicle to reject kids who have the test scores and grades.

Kids who are not exhibiting "gifted" behaviors generally are capable of having their educational needs met in the regular classroom.

So, by your estimation then, kids who are brilliant and way above grade level, but are quiet and shy don't belong in AAP. And kids who are so far above the curriculum that they tune out and daydream don't belong in AAP. And kids who the teacher just doesn't like don't belong in AAP. Or in the case of the PPs, apparently kids with exceptionally high test scores who are also rated as having a 15 GBRS don't belong in AAP, because the teachers didn't write up the forms the way the committee likes or provide the types of work samples the committee likes.

One of the main arguments for gifted programming is that gifted kids often are so poorly served by gen ed that they end up not being high achievers and don't "display gifted characteristics" in a gen ed classroom.

It would be one thing if the program were small with a limited number of seats. In FCPS, 20% of the kids are in Level IV. Even if people are prepping, at this point there's no reason not to just give people the benefit of the doubt and let them in.

Anonymous wrote:If both of the cases here are true, then the system truly is broken. The director was clearly grasping for a reason for rejection, which shows that they could pretty much justify rejecting any child for any reason. The only solution offered was to try again next year with essentially the same packet, which also means that the child really ought to have been selected this year.

Holistic reviews are fine and all, but they should be used to admit kids who otherwise didn't make the cut. They shouldn't be used as a vehicle to reject kids who have the test scores and grades.

The problem is that tests are taken on one, or at most a few days. It is possible to prep children for tests so that they get higher scores than they would without prepping.

Teacher comments, on the other hand, are based on many, many days of first hand observation. Sometimes children's behaviors back up test scores, sometimes they don't. Kids who are not exhibiting "gifted" behaviors generally are capable of having their educational needs met in the regular classroom.

Looking at only test scores does not give a detailed enough picture of the child and his or her educational needs.

If both of the cases here are true, then the system truly is broken. The director was clearly grasping for a reason for rejection, which shows that they could pretty much justify rejecting any child for any reason. The only solution offered was to try again next year with essentially the same packet, which also means that the child really ought to have been selected this year.

Holistic reviews are fine and all, but they should be used to admit kids who otherwise didn't make the cut. They shouldn't be used as a vehicle to reject kids who have the test scores and grades.

Anonymous wrote:OP posted that two other applicants from her school were admitted, so the teachers know how/what to write in comments.

What does it tell the committee if there's no work sample in OP's file, along with underwhelming comments???

Did they get in with lower scores? (which btw, OP: those scores should have locked your kids in, IMHO).

It could be a misfire in the application, meaning that the teachers thought that that with your scores the rest of the packet wouldn't need to be as in depth as the others.
Alternatively, they may be doing a reverse creaming-- trying to get rid of sub-par kids and keeping yours in the private school.

Whatever it is, AAP is not the end all be all. As evidenced by the many anti-AAP people in this forum. It all resets in high school.

OP posted that two other applicants from her school were admitted, so the teachers know how/what to write in comments.

What does it tell the committee if there's no work sample in OP's file, along with underwhelming comments???

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here

I tried calling the coordinator as in the first call did not give any answer about rejection with Wisc score

Haven’t spoken to her yet

I am thinking of asking her whom should I reach out if I want the application to be looked at again. If the reasons are arbitrary like work samples and commentary then we will keep seeing cases like us

After the pp mentioned about commentary I went and checked the same in our application . His teacher has not given samples either

The commentary on the GBRS is not arbitrary. It reflects regular observations of the child over weeks and months. If the commentary doesn't back up the scores, it is a really important piece of the application package.

I really would check in to see if this is the norm for all private schools. If your private school has a reputation of being able to send kids into the AAP program, then this is a possible aberration of a trend. But if there is no record of doing so, it doesn't seem so far fetched that they would lack motivation to prepare a good packet for you to successfully get in.

In other words, the private schools could be scamming you. Just a thought.

Anonymous wrote:Op here

I tried calling the coordinator as in the first call did not give any answer about rejection with Wisc score

Haven’t spoken to her yet

I am thinking of asking her whom should I reach out if I want the application to be looked at again. If the reasons are arbitrary like work samples and commentary then we will keep seeing cases like us

After the pp mentioned about commentary I went and checked the same in our application . His teacher has not given samples either

The commentary on the GBRS is not arbitrary. It reflects regular observations of the child over weeks and months. If the commentary doesn't back up the scores, it is a really important piece of the application package.

This is op

That’s the irony. We heard the same, work samples and GBRS from private schools don’t matter much as they are not from fcps and only scores matter

Here we are given reasons GBRS and samples not good enough

If they’re going by the GBRS, my kid is so screwed. Her teacher is terse. She’s a woman of few words. There isn’t a lot of space for elaboration on the form, and she kept it very much brief and to the point.

The funny thing is that I heard from DD’s friend’s mom (FCPS employee privy to the process) that private school GBRS is only minimally weighted, since private school teachers have no training in how to properly write one.

If they’re going by the GBRS, my kid is so screwed. Her teacher is terse. She’s a woman of few words.

The funny thing is that I heard from DD’s friend’s mom (FCPS employee privy to the process) that private school GBRS is only minimally weighted, since private school teachers have no training in how to properly write one.