Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school AART teacher said the lowest score she saw in the accepted students last year is 142. That seems unrealistic high for me.

She probably mis-spoke and meant to say 132. That number would make sense for a higher-SES school.

I doubt she mis-spoke, there are schools where a 142 would be the norm.

Which is why the test scores have become meaningless and irrelevant. Parents broke them.

I am not so sure parents broke them. My kid goes to a very high SES school (i.e. 1% of kids are free an reduced meals), and he scored right around there. All we did was some practice problems from a $5 workbook. We did not even finish the workbook because it was clear he understood. I really don’t know any of his friends who were going to test prep places and we do lots of car pools for activities, so I am looped into a lot of family schedules. I would not doubt many of his friends also scored that high. They are smart kids. There are just a lot of really smart and accomplished people around here. Intelligence is due both to heredity and environment, the latter of which means so much more than an hour of test prep. Kids in this school have a lot going for them without a lot of prep.

I am glad America will have these future leaders. Why is that a bad thing? We should celebrate their emerging capacity.

To sum: The lies we tell ourselves to justify prepping for aptitude tests.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school AART teacher said the lowest score she saw in the accepted students last year is 142. That seems unrealistic high for me.

She probably mis-spoke and meant to say 132. That number would make sense for a higher-SES school.

I doubt she mis-spoke, there are schools where a 142 would be the norm.

Which is why the test scores have become meaningless and irrelevant. Parents broke them.

I am not so sure parents broke them. My kid goes to a very high SES school (i.e. 1% of kids are free an reduced meals), and he scored right around there. All we did was some practice problems from a $5 workbook. We did not even finish the workbook because it was clear he understood. I really don’t know any of his friends who were going to test prep places and we do lots of car pools for activities, so I am looped into a lot of family schedules. I would not doubt many of his friends also scored that high. They are smart kids. There are just a lot of really smart and accomplished people around here. Intelligence is due both to heredity and environment, the latter of which means so much more than an hour of test prep. Kids in this school have a lot going for them without a lot of prep.

I am glad America will have these future leaders. Why is that a bad thing? We should celebrate their emerging capacity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school AART teacher said the lowest score she saw in the accepted students last year is 142. That seems unrealistic high for me.

She probably mis-spoke and meant to say 132. That number would make sense for a higher-SES school.

I doubt she mis-spoke, there are schools where a 142 would be the norm.

Which is why the test scores have become meaningless and irrelevant. Parents broke them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school AART teacher said the lowest score she saw in the accepted students last year is 142. That seems unrealistic high for me.

She probably mis-spoke and meant to say 132. That number would make sense for a higher-SES school.

I doubt she mis-spoke, there are schools where a 142 would be the norm.

Which is why the test scores have become meaningless and irrelevant. Parents broke them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school AART teacher said the lowest score she saw in the accepted students last year is 142. That seems unrealistic high for me.

She probably mis-spoke and meant to say 132. That number would make sense for a higher-SES school.

I doubt she mis-spoke, there are schools where a 142 would be the norm.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school AART teacher said the lowest score she saw in the accepted students last year is 142. That seems unrealistic high for me.

She probably mis-spoke and meant to say 132. That number would make sense for a higher-SES school.

Anonymous wrote:Our school AART teacher said the lowest score she saw in the accepted students last year is 142. That seems unrealistic high for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have a link to see how one interprets the scores? How do you know the percentiles? Google was not my friend. Most talk about Stanine scores range, but I don’t have that. The scores are below. Thanks.



Cognitive Abilities Test
Test Part Standard Age Score
Quantitative 137
Nonverbal 143
Verbal 133
VQN Total 142

The official report has the percentiles and the stanines. You'll receive that from the school or in the mail.

Fwiw, those scores are all 98 or 99 percentile nationally.

Do you you how the distribution for FCPS compares to national scores?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have a link to see how one interprets the scores? How do you know the percentiles? Google was not my friend. Most talk about Stanine scores range, but I don’t have that. The scores are below. Thanks.



Cognitive Abilities Test
Test Part Standard Age Score
Quantitative 137
Nonverbal 143
Verbal 133
VQN Total 142

The official report has the percentiles and the stanines. You'll receive that from the school or in the mail.

Fwiw, those scores are all 98 or 99 percentile nationally.

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have a link to see how one interprets the scores? How do you know the percentiles? Google was not my friend. Most talk about Stanine scores range, but I don’t have that. The scores are below. Thanks.



Cognitive Abilities Test
Test Part Standard Age Score
Quantitative 137
Nonverbal 143
Verbal 133
VQN Total 142

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yikes. What do you make of this?

Q-139
NV-133
V-108
VQN-134

I am really surprised by the verbal score. He did well on the fall Iready for reading, so I have no idea what to make of this. Any thoughts and thank you!

Verbal CogAT doesn't use words or reading. Instead, the kids must select pictures to answer the questions. Some kids are good at language arts but bad at interpreting the pictures.

If you think the verbal score is not an accurate reflection of your child's abilities, the most important thing is to demonstrate in your packet that your child is strong in language arts. Include a short story or something showing advanced writing skills. In the parent questionnaire, give examples of your child's advanced verbal ability. See if you can include iready scores or some other evidence of being advanced in language arts.

I was in a similar boat years ago. Kid taught himself to read at age 4, was always in the highest reading group, and was a strong writer in 2nd grade. He had a 98th percentile score in WISC Verbal section.
Got a 113 Verbal CogAT. He has found AAP language arts extremely easy, despite the low CogAT Verbal score.

Thanks, PP. May I ask whether you did or would recommend that I address this score explicitly in the parent referral packet or just focus on his LA strengths?

Don't try to explicitly rebut the score. Just focus on LA strengths. Make it clear that your child will have no problems at all with handling advanced language arts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yikes. What do you make of this?

Q-139
NV-133
V-108
VQN-134

I am really surprised by the verbal score. He did well on the fall Iready for reading, so I have no idea what to make of this. Any thoughts and thank you!

Verbal CogAT doesn't use words or reading. Instead, the kids must select pictures to answer the questions. Some kids are good at language arts but bad at interpreting the pictures.

If you think the verbal score is not an accurate reflection of your child's abilities, the most important thing is to demonstrate in your packet that your child is strong in language arts. Include a short story or something showing advanced writing skills. In the parent questionnaire, give examples of your child's advanced verbal ability. See if you can include iready scores or some other evidence of being advanced in language arts.

Thanks very much.

I was in a similar boat years ago. Kid taught himself to read at age 4, was always in the highest reading group, and was a strong writer in 2nd grade. He had a 98th percentile score in WISC Verbal section.
Got a 113 Verbal CogAT. He has found AAP language arts extremely easy, despite the low CogAT Verbal score.

Thanks, PP. May I ask whether you did or would recommend that I address this score explicitly in the parent referral packet or just focus on his LA strengths?

Don't try to explicitly rebut the score. Just focus on LA strengths. Make it clear that your child will have no problems at all with handling advanced language arts.

Anonymous wrote:Our school AART teacher said the lowest score she saw in the accepted students last year is 142. That seems unrealistic high for me.