Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why this is cheating? You can’t just accuse someone of cheating without having all the facts in place.

Why is it fine to teach a child these concepts in general but not using a book designed for the test?

Do you actually believe the test is measuring innate knowledge or learned behavior? It’s pretty clear to me it’s learned behavior so it shouldn’t matter how it is learned.

The behaviors can be learned, and thus can be taught. Very bright kids engage in those behaviors without being taught. The idea of the test is to find the kids who can answer questions they’ve never seen before without being taught how to answer them.

Please, you’re telling me without any stimulation from parents kids would just spontaneously develop those skills?

So it’s fine the way you choose to teach your kids, but the way others do it turns into a shameful sin?

The responses on this thread that shame the OP for teaching her kids some concepts are simply embarrassing. They likely come from people that don’t have even the most basic knowledge on learning and child development.

You do realize that some people are just naturally more intelligent than other people, right? Some people will always learn more quickly and easily than others. Those are the children these tests are looking for- not children who have been taught to imitate highly intelligent people. Eventually the kids who have been taught how to take the test will not be able to keep faking it.

That’s not where the bar is set at FCPS AAP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why this is cheating? You can’t just accuse someone of cheating without having all the facts in place.

Why is it fine to teach a child these concepts in general but not using a book designed for the test?

Do you actually believe the test is measuring innate knowledge or learned behavior? It’s pretty clear to me it’s learned behavior so it shouldn’t matter how it is learned.

The behaviors can be learned, and thus can be taught. Very bright kids engage in those behaviors without being taught. The idea of the test is to find the kids who can answer questions they’ve never seen before without being taught how to answer them.

Please, you’re telling me without any stimulation from parents kids would just spontaneously develop those skills?

So it’s fine the way you choose to teach your kids, but the way others do it turns into a shameful sin?

The responses on this thread that shame the OP for teaching her kids some concepts are simply embarrassing. They likely come from people that don’t have even the most basic knowledge on learning and child development.

You do realize that some people are just naturally more intelligent than other people, right? Some people will always learn more quickly and easily than others. Those are the children these tests are looking for- not children who have been taught to imitate highly intelligent people. Eventually the kids who have been taught how to take the test will not be able to keep faking it.

I think OP’s point is that some kids may exhibit these behaviors because they’ve been exposed to various enrichment activities. The nature/nurture debate on intelligence is far from settled on this point.

Generally, children won’t exhibit specific problem solving behaviors unless they are either born with the ability or they are taught how the proper approach. Children who naturally grasp how to solve these problems tend to be very intelligent- they don’t need to be taught these behaviors, they just “get it” without being taught.

Enrichment like going to museums and reading lots of picture books doesn’t teach kids how to solve these questions.

DP. Are you saying children shouldn’t be taught problem strategies at all, lest they swindle their way into AAP?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why this is cheating? You can’t just accuse someone of cheating without having all the facts in place.

Why is it fine to teach a child these concepts in general but not using a book designed for the test?

Do you actually believe the test is measuring innate knowledge or learned behavior? It’s pretty clear to me it’s learned behavior so it shouldn’t matter how it is learned.

The behaviors can be learned, and thus can be taught. Very bright kids engage in those behaviors without being taught. The idea of the test is to find the kids who can answer questions they’ve never seen before without being taught how to answer them.

Please, you’re telling me without any stimulation from parents kids would just spontaneously develop those skills?

So it’s fine the way you choose to teach your kids, but the way others do it turns into a shameful sin?

The responses on this thread that shame the OP for teaching her kids some concepts are simply embarrassing. They likely come from people that don’t have even the most basic knowledge on learning and child development.

You do realize that some people are just naturally more intelligent than other people, right? Some people will always learn more quickly and easily than others. Those are the children these tests are looking for- not children who have been taught to imitate highly intelligent people. Eventually the kids who have been taught how to take the test will not be able to keep faking it.

I think OP’s point is that some kids may exhibit these behaviors because they’ve been exposed to various enrichment activities. The nature/nurture debate on intelligence is far from settled on this point.

Generally, children won’t exhibit specific problem solving behaviors unless they are either born with the ability or they are taught how the proper approach. Children who naturally grasp how to solve these problems tend to be very intelligent- they don’t need to be taught these behaviors, they just “get it” without being taught.

Enrichment like going to museums and reading lots of picture books doesn’t teach kids how to solve these questions.

It’s truly shocking how ignorant you are on this topic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why this is cheating? You can’t just accuse someone of cheating without having all the facts in place.

Why is it fine to teach a child these concepts in general but not using a book designed for the test?

Do you actually believe the test is measuring innate knowledge or learned behavior? It’s pretty clear to me it’s learned behavior so it shouldn’t matter how it is learned.

The behaviors can be learned, and thus can be taught. Very bright kids engage in those behaviors without being taught. The idea of the test is to find the kids who can answer questions they’ve never seen before without being taught how to answer them.

Please, you’re telling me without any stimulation from parents kids would just spontaneously develop those skills?

So it’s fine the way you choose to teach your kids, but the way others do it turns into a shameful sin?

The responses on this thread that shame the OP for teaching her kids some concepts are simply embarrassing. They likely come from people that don’t have even the most basic knowledge on learning and child development.

You do realize that some people are just naturally more intelligent than other people, right? Some people will always learn more quickly and easily than others. Those are the children these tests are looking for- not children who have been taught to imitate highly intelligent people. Eventually the kids who have been taught how to take the test will not be able to keep faking it.

No, that’s absolutely not what IQ tests measure, you have no idea what you’re talking about. So IQ tests measure how fast people learn? That’s the first time I hear this ridiculous claim.

When your understanding of the topic is so flimsy, I suggest you refrain from passing judgement on other people cheating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why this is cheating? You can’t just accuse someone of cheating without having all the facts in place.

Why is it fine to teach a child these concepts in general but not using a book designed for the test?

Do you actually believe the test is measuring innate knowledge or learned behavior? It’s pretty clear to me it’s learned behavior so it shouldn’t matter how it is learned.

The behaviors can be learned, and thus can be taught. Very bright kids engage in those behaviors without being taught. The idea of the test is to find the kids who can answer questions they’ve never seen before without being taught how to answer them.

Please, you’re telling me without any stimulation from parents kids would just spontaneously develop those skills?

So it’s fine the way you choose to teach your kids, but the way others do it turns into a shameful sin?

The responses on this thread that shame the OP for teaching her kids some concepts are simply embarrassing. They likely come from people that don’t have even the most basic knowledge on learning and child development.

You do realize that some people are just naturally more intelligent than other people, right? Some people will always learn more quickly and easily than others. Those are the children these tests are looking for- not children who have been taught to imitate highly intelligent people. Eventually the kids who have been taught how to take the test will not be able to keep faking it.

I think OP’s point is that some kids may exhibit these behaviors because they’ve been exposed to various enrichment activities. The nature/nurture debate on intelligence is far from settled on this point.

Generally, children won’t exhibit specific problem solving behaviors unless they are either born with the ability or they are taught how the proper approach. Children who naturally grasp how to solve these problems tend to be very intelligent- they don’t need to be taught these behaviors, they just “get it” without being taught.

Enrichment like going to museums and reading lots of picture books doesn’t teach kids how to solve these questions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why this is cheating? You can’t just accuse someone of cheating without having all the facts in place.

Why is it fine to teach a child these concepts in general but not using a book designed for the test?

Do you actually believe the test is measuring innate knowledge or learned behavior? It’s pretty clear to me it’s learned behavior so it shouldn’t matter how it is learned.

The behaviors can be learned, and thus can be taught. Very bright kids engage in those behaviors without being taught. The idea of the test is to find the kids who can answer questions they’ve never seen before without being taught how to answer them.

Please, you’re telling me without any stimulation from parents kids would just spontaneously develop those skills?

So it’s fine the way you choose to teach your kids, but the way others do it turns into a shameful sin?

The responses on this thread that shame the OP for teaching her kids some concepts are simply embarrassing. They likely come from people that don’t have even the most basic knowledge on learning and child development.

You do realize that some people are just naturally more intelligent than other people, right? Some people will always learn more quickly and easily than others. Those are the children these tests are looking for- not children who have been taught to imitate highly intelligent people. Eventually the kids who have been taught how to take the test will not be able to keep faking it.

I think OP’s point is that some kids may exhibit these behaviors because they’ve been exposed to various enrichment activities. The nature/nurture debate on intelligence is far from settled on this point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why this is cheating? You can’t just accuse someone of cheating without having all the facts in place.

Why is it fine to teach a child these concepts in general but not using a book designed for the test?

Do you actually believe the test is measuring innate knowledge or learned behavior? It’s pretty clear to me it’s learned behavior so it shouldn’t matter how it is learned.

The behaviors can be learned, and thus can be taught. Very bright kids engage in those behaviors without being taught. The idea of the test is to find the kids who can answer questions they’ve never seen before without being taught how to answer them.

Please, you’re telling me without any stimulation from parents kids would just spontaneously develop those skills?

So it’s fine the way you choose to teach your kids, but the way others do it turns into a shameful sin?

The responses on this thread that shame the OP for teaching her kids some concepts are simply embarrassing. They likely come from people that don’t have even the most basic knowledge on learning and child development.

You do realize that some people are just naturally more intelligent than other people, right? Some people will always learn more quickly and easily than others. Those are the children these tests are looking for- not children who have been taught to imitate highly intelligent people. Eventually the kids who have been taught how to take the test will not be able to keep faking it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think prepping is cheating, and I'm baffled by people who say it is.

If you're worried that kids who prep will get in but then be unable to keep up with the work, say that. But it doesn't make prepping a cheat. There is no other context (SAT, job interview, debate) in which practicing a particular form of answer is called cheating.

Studying for an IQ test is cheating. Not everyone takes an IQ test, so you may not know that. The Cogat is the same way.

Where has FCPS said that any prepping for the CogAT is cheating? If this was the case, then they would have it all over the AAP website and notification process for 2nd grade testing.

-mom who reviewed a few sample online free questions each night in the week leading up to the test and has zero guilt with an in-pool child.

Anything that gives other kids a chance to be competitive against her child is considered cheating. Anything she does for her own child is ‘enrichment’.

She also has no idea what an IQ test measures or what it is about but nevertheless she’s going to give her unsolicited expert opinion.

Who is giving their expert opinion? I don’t follow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think prepping is cheating, and I'm baffled by people who say it is.

If you're worried that kids who prep will get in but then be unable to keep up with the work, say that. But it doesn't make prepping a cheat. There is no other context (SAT, job interview, debate) in which practicing a particular form of answer is called cheating.

Studying for an IQ test is cheating. Not everyone takes an IQ test, so you may not know that. The Cogat is the same way.

Where has FCPS said that any prepping for the CogAT is cheating? If this was the case, then they would have it all over the AAP website and notification process for 2nd grade testing.

-mom who reviewed a few sample online free questions each night in the week leading up to the test and has zero guilt with an in-pool child.

Anything that gives other kids a chance to be competitive against her child is considered cheating. Anything she does for her own child is ‘enrichment’.

She also has no idea what an IQ test measures or what it is about but nevertheless she’s going to give her unsolicited expert opinion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why this is cheating? You can’t just accuse someone of cheating without having all the facts in place.

Why is it fine to teach a child these concepts in general but not using a book designed for the test?

Do you actually believe the test is measuring innate knowledge or learned behavior? It’s pretty clear to me it’s learned behavior so it shouldn’t matter how it is learned.

The behaviors can be learned, and thus can be taught. Very bright kids engage in those behaviors without being taught. The idea of the test is to find the kids who can answer questions they’ve never seen before without being taught how to answer them.

Please, you’re telling me without any stimulation from parents kids would just spontaneously develop those skills?

So it’s fine the way you choose to teach your kids, but the way others do it turns into a shameful sin?

The responses on this thread that shame the OP for teaching her kids some concepts are simply embarrassing. They likely come from people that don’t have even the most basic knowledge on learning and child development.

OP, the reason your child will succeed, is because he has a parent that cares. DD went to a not well rated school with a significant FARMS population. She had kids in her class that came from families that could not afford enrichment and tutors, but did place high value on working hard and getting a good education. Those kids are doing JUST FINE.

FWIW, your child will have the opportunity for some enrichment- instruments, for instance, through school. If that turns into a passion, there are ways to get them more opportunities to develop those skills, without much financial burden.

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why this is cheating? You can’t just accuse someone of cheating without having all the facts in place.

Why is it fine to teach a child these concepts in general but not using a book designed for the test?

Do you actually believe the test is measuring innate knowledge or learned behavior? It’s pretty clear to me it’s learned behavior so it shouldn’t matter how it is learned.

The behaviors can be learned, and thus can be taught. Very bright kids engage in those behaviors without being taught. The idea of the test is to find the kids who can answer questions they’ve never seen before without being taught how to answer them.

Can someone explain why this is cheating? You can’t just accuse someone of cheating without having all the facts in place.

Why is it fine to teach a child these concepts in general but not using a book designed for the test?

Do you actually believe the test is measuring innate knowledge or learned behavior? It’s pretty clear to me it’s learned behavior so it shouldn’t matter how it is learned.

Anonymous wrote:Poor Asian and this is how we did it for the most part except everyone complains about us and our “prepping!”

Lower class South Asian. Same.

Lol OP. You’re doing everything right. You should prep. I hope your kid gets in.

You will notice people opposed to prepping casually say oh we didn’t prep and DC got in on his super high smarts. No one is here saying we didn’t prep, my kid didn’t get in and I am STILL insisting on not prepping.

We are UMC immigrants, my kids are in every conceivable enrichment including piano, RSM and tennis, and I prep the living crap out of them.