Anonymous wrote:My school, about 22 of 23 in pool kids made it and at least 2 referals that i know of.
Anonymous wrote:This year the 2nd grade pool was much smaller because of the new FAT test. Also, the amount of kids accepted this year is much less.
The AAP office has let the program explode over the past few years and has gotten push back from SB, so they are making it harder to get in. One good score alone won't get you in anymore.
For appeals I think that the same numbers that got you in last year, may not be the same. Appeals may be much harder this year. The only kids that got in at our school are the real standouts. Just seems like the program is going back to a smaller size.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I have never understood the anger and pushiness until now. My first child was s model in school and got in without me even filling out the parents' questionnaire. Now my son passed both nnnat (99%) and FxAT (97%), but was rejected for very low GBRS and work samples. As their parents, I know they have similar IQs, but different styles. I know my son needs AAP more as he could not concentrate if there is not enough challenge. But my daughter could be an excellent student anywhere.
Now I am a pushy parent and will appeal. Please tell me if somebody can stay calm if their kids have strong testing scores but rejected! Why bother to test at the first place then? Isn't the testing suppose to catch the kids who would otherwise not be noticed?
because the tests alone aren't determinative. Maybe they're looking for kids whose GBRS and work samples tend to corroborate the high test scores.
Any selection that is not based on test scores are subjective to bias from the school. In the end its FCPS family all over, so the central selection committee sometimes decides to ignore the aberration, and other times it is particular.
Anonymous wrote:I have a question based on the above comments. How is it possible that a child, who does very well in all tests (not only NNAT and FxAT but also WISC), plus has good grades (meaning that the child is not having any issues at school), doesn't have decent GBRS or strong work samples? What could be happening in the classroom to make this obviously very smart child not show any notable signs of intelligence, yet do well in grades and high-level tests? What could be a reasonable explanation for that?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I have a question based on the above comments. How is it possible that a child, who does very well in all tests (not only NNAT and FxAT but also WISC), plus has good grades (meaning that the child is not having any issues at school), doesn't have decent GBRS or strong work samples? What could be happening in the classroom to make this obviously very smart child not show any notable signs of intelligence, yet do well in grades and high-level tests? What could be a reasonable explanation for that?
They have a word for this. Its called "Prejudice".
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I have never understood the anger and pushiness until now. My first child was s model in school and got in without me even filling out the parents' questionnaire. Now my son passed both nnnat (99%) and FxAT (97%), but was rejected for very low GBRS and work samples. As their parents, I know they have similar IQs, but different styles. I know my son needs AAP more as he could not concentrate if there is not enough challenge. But my daughter could be an excellent student anywhere.
Now I am a pushy parent and will appeal. Please tell me if somebody can stay calm if their kids have strong testing scores but rejected! Why bother to test at the first place then? Isn't the testing suppose to catch the kids who would otherwise not be noticed?
because the tests alone aren't determinative. Maybe they're looking for kids whose GBRS and work samples tend to corroborate the high test scores.