Anonymous wrote:Not in high SES schools where even if the kid score 110, parents still refer.

Which is what I was getting at initially. Worst case scenario the group being considered is exactly the same under this year's rules and last year's rules for those high SES schools.

Anonymous wrote:If anything, parents of kids in the 132-139 range that aren't in pool should realize that their kids now have slightly less competition than before. There will be some small group of parents whose kids also scored in that range but don't parent refer which now won't also be considered alongside your child and would have been under last year's rules.

Not in high SES schools where even if the kid score 110, parents still refer.

If anything, parents of kids in the 132-139 range that aren't in pool should realize that their kids now have slightly less competition than before. There will be some small group of parents whose kids also scored in that range but don't parent refer which now won't also be considered alongside your child and would have been under last year's rules.

Anonymous wrote:Looks like you don’t have a horse in this race, so it’s like drama for you. Even too college admissions and TJ also looks like drama to many folks here.

No, this is just a bunch of parents panicking over whether their kid's package has "in pool" checked somewhere or not. The entire rest of the packet is exactly the same. Same scores, same GBRS, same parent questionnaire.

AAP should be there, it should be just the top 2 to 5% of the class. Not that every parent irrespective of the score is allowed to refer and gets through due to the subjective GBRS.

Gifted students need to be well served. If too performers are served in sports why not do the same for academics.
Basketball is full of AA kids, why not make room for Asian kids by lowering the standards? It’s not equity if Asians are not selected in basketball due to their height.
Equity shouldn’t be just for academics, it should be for everything and everyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with having higher cutoffs for center schools is … any of the local school kids found eligible can now go to the center… but if you have a center full of a 140 plus class it will move at a totally different pace than a class with 120 level iq.

This really only makes sense if centers did not exist.

...which jives with rumors that FCPS eventually plans to do away with the centers.

Exactly. Other states have done away with gifts and talented and advanced math. Well ... if you want to take away advanced academics, then let’s get rid of varsity sports and make room for my tiny kids on the basketball team.

High cut off scores in high performing schools will work better. They should work on eliminating so many parent referrals also. Of course in every parents eyes their snow flake is genius and AAP worthy.

Yes anyone can parent refer that’s the problem. There has to be cutoff after when parents are not able to refer. In high SES schools everyone ( more than half of class ) parents refer and that’s the problem. I support the high cutoff scores.
Pool is exactly what it should meant to be. Once not in pool referral should not be considered
This makes school prepare packet for hundreds of kids. This makes the central committee review thousands of files. And the gifted ones sometimes get lost in those files.

Anonymous wrote:It’s going to get harder to get in AAP. This is the first step towards equity and eliminate the prep crowd (scores between 130 to 140) in SES schools who are the most hated everywhere. Race, color of skin, parents status, income is more important than hard work. Even AAP kids are hated! It’s not an easy label to carry.
The unfortunate thing is some kids may suffer and some kids will get lucky, especially from lower SES schools who have lower cutoff to be in pool.
Equity means providing equal opportunities.

The way to achieve equity would be to make the program entirely score-based. Take the top 2% in each school and make that the gifted program. This may result in a kid at Churchill not making the cut with a 139 cogat when a kid at a low ranked school gets into aap with a 125. But, the assumption would be that the gen Ed program at Churchill is already teaching toward the high end in the first place. The problem with this whole system is the parent referrals. This system-my child is special, believe me—is what disadvantages the poor and underrepresented minorities. It is always going to be the educated and wealthy who will win that political battle. If intelligence tests show that you are one of the very brightest in the school, then you need the extra attention. If not, then you should be fine in gen Ed.

Anonymous wrote:I don't know what's with all the drama. Every parent on this forum whose child scored 132-139 was going to parent refer anyway. Those kids are looked at just like everyone else. The scores are in the packet and are the same numbers no matter where the imaginary "in pool" line was drawn.

Looks like you don’t have a horse in this race, so it’s like drama for you. Even too college admissions and TJ also looks like drama to many folks here.

I don't know what's with all the drama. Every parent on this forum whose child scored 132-139 was going to parent refer anyway. Those kids are looked at just like everyone else. The scores are in the packet and are the same numbers no matter where the imaginary "in pool" line was drawn.

It’s going to get harder to get in AAP. This is the first step towards equity and eliminate the prep crowd (scores between 130 to 140) in SES schools who are the most hated everywhere. Race, color of skin, parents status, income is more important than hard work. Even AAP kids are hated! It’s not an easy label to carry.
The unfortunate thing is some kids may suffer and some kids will get lucky, especially from lower SES schools who have lower cutoff to be in pool.
Equity means providing equal opportunities.

Anonymous wrote:AART says inpool decision made by central office on a school by school basis and the school itself weren't told the cutoff for pool.

Wow

Anonymous wrote:AART says inpool decision made by central office on a school by school basis and the school itself weren't told the cutoff for pool.

FCPS schedule said central office made the pool also.

I find it weird they want to be opaque as to how it was done…

AART says inpool decision made by central office on a school by school basis and the school itself weren't told the cutoff for pool.