Anonymous wrote:Back to the original topic...

Is there any citable data on the number of in-pool and eligible?

You can submit a FOIA request.

Back to the original topic...

Is there any citable data on the number of in-pool and eligible?

Anonymous wrote:How on earth do you have the time to spend so much of it worrying about other people's kids?

Exactly! I have 3 of my own and am at my limit of time and energy with them alone. Academics is not a competitive sport - you don't need all the stats on the other players.

How on earth do you have the time to spend so much of it worrying about other people's kids?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares?

+10000

+ another 10000. Why are people so wrapped up in stuff like this? It's no wonder that VA Schools forum was dying to get rid of us.

How do you know the people got in and did not get in? Parental gossip? Or who you saw in at the orientation. If it is the latter, than is not reliable, as not everyone goes to the orientation.

I echo 21:43. Also there were at least 3 kids who weren't in the pool and not referred that I fully expect to be principal designees and truly are much more academically Advanced than many of those who got in.

At our school we are pretty much aware of who got in first round and who has parents currently appealing for them. But at the same time I know of a couple of extremely bright kids who are not yet in so would think no less of those admitted later or not at all. It is a puzzling process.

Anonymous wrote:Who cares?

+10000

Who cares? My DC got in 1st round, now in 5th. She has no idea who was in on appeal and who was in 1st round. She is focused on her studies, as she should be.

Anonymous wrote:There parents that claim to know who got in on appeal, and who was designated, etc., are full of it. Unless they have access to the files, they will not know. The parents are either BS'ing it, or basing it on student performance....this child is not doing well, so s/he must be a principal placement.

I had a parent commenting about the system, complaining about the non-pool and appeals kids leading to overcrowding. Her assumption was my child was in pool. Her assumption was incorrect.

I bet some of the better students are students who were not in pool, as those are the "better students" that had good GBRS.

Our center held an orientation during the summer for the kids who got in on appeal, and the kids seem to know who was at the first orientation and who was at the second.

There parents that claim to know who got in on appeal, and who was designated, etc., are full of it. Unless they have access to the files, they will not know. The parents are either BS'ing it, or basing it on student performance....this child is not doing well, so s/he must be a principal placement.

I had a parent commenting about the system, complaining about the non-pool and appeals kids leading to overcrowding. Her assumption was my child was in pool. Her assumption was incorrect.

I bet some of the better students are students who were not in pool, as those are the "better students" that had good GBRS.

Anonymous wrote:My ds goes to a school where roughly 50% of the third graders are in the LLIV AAP classes (two classes out of four). Fortunately the AAP teacher did not "dumb down" the curricula in any way. At the close of the year I have a few observations about the non-center eligible students (i.e. principal designated students) in my child's class. The very bright but not "gifted" had to work a little harder to keep up, and in a few months fared just as well as the "truly gifted" ones. The bright but average child struggled to keep up, some had extra help at home and/or after school, and wound up doing ok at the end. The average to slow child (yes, there were a few whose parents insisted be designated) appeared so lost in class and miserable during lessons. But they were happy to get the "gifted" tag nonetheless.

I call bullshit on this post. I don't believe that you actually know who got in, versus who got in on appeal, versus who was principal designated. I think people see kids struggling and presumtiously ASSUME that those are the kids who were principal designated. Because it serves their own inflated egos.

My son got in on the first round (he was in pool), but I wouldn't be suprised if he struggled some next yesr for a variety of reasons. I know a kid who is SUPER bright, but somehow only got in on appeal last year (despite the high numbers).

And I know a couple who got in on the first round this year, who seem to me to be very average students.

The system is pretty good, but its not pwrfect. It let's in some kids who are not so bright, and sometimes keeps really smart kids out. From what I've observed, the "principal designated" kids do just fine, and frequnetly better than the "selected kids."

Let's keep it real.

Anonymous wrote:My daughter's AAP teacher mentioned that she does not even know (let alone or track or compare) the center-eligibles from the principal-placed students. So how on Earth would you know?

I think its fair to say that the children themselves might figure this out. DC often comments and finds it strange that kid x or kid y didn't understand something, or got a bunch of questions wrong on something. DC isn't being mean. He doesn't realize his own ability and assumes everyone learns like he does. My gosh they're only 8 and 9. But I think over time they know where they stand in class. It's just human nature. I have no idea who is who is DC class... but I guess I form opinions over time from the stories I hear at home.

Anonymous wrote:Seems a bit unfair that they took in so many kids last year and have suddenly decided to curb the numbers - they should really have an internal test to see if kids should stay in the program at some point after 3rd grade. I only know of one child who applied last year and did not get accepted (3rd grade).

Where is the unfairness?

The numbers were off last year, and they corrected that issue.

Life happens. So a few extra kids in the current third grade class get extra services. Not a big deal.