Anonymous wrote:My kids was in his backpack. Cogat is a 137, but he was sick the day of the Nagleri and it is only a 111. Pretty sure he’s not getting in because his teacher doesn’t “get” him and seems annoyed by him.

If it provides you any comfort, my kid had almost the exact same scores as you. I was also worried his second grade teacher didn’t get him. But he got in on the first round and is thriving in the program.

My kid got in a couple of years ago with 118 NNAT and high 120s on CogAt (not in pool - I referred). They’ve been doing great. You really never know. Just do everything you can do and then put it out of your mind.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids was in his backpack. Cogat is a 137, but he was sick the day of the Nagleri and it is only a 111. Pretty sure he’s not getting in because his teacher doesn’t “get” him and seems annoyed by him.

We had the opposite, my kid was sick during the CogAt and got a 118 but his NNAT was higher, 130. We’ll see what happens. I won’t get my hopes up. He does seem to be fairly well liked by the teachers and our ES and pyramid are not one of the most competitive ones.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The scores is good, OP. It certainly isn't going to hurt your kid. The issue is that they no longer place much emphasis on the scores. The committee takes the GBRS more seriously.

Ultimately it is an advanced program, not a gifted program and, in a way, the GBRS measures the likelihood of success in an advanced program. Clearly kids with strong executive functions do well on GBRS and get into AAP even if their score is in the 120s. If your child scores 140 but has a mediocre GBRS, she won't get in.

It wasn't like this ten-fifteen years ago. Back then, most kids in-pool were pretty much in.

It really doesn't, though. Years ago, my kid tested at multiple years above grade level in all domains and way above the 99th percentile cutoff in both math and reading iready tests. He got perfect scores on the two academic portions of the GBRS, but still got poor scores in the "Creativity" and "Motivation" parts of the GBRS. The teacher only viewed kids as "motivated" if they asked for extra busywork and took a lot of time on coloring sheets. If they instead were studying things on their own or reading very advanced for grade level books, the teacher viewed them as unmotivated. Likewise, if they didn't create pretty artwork, she viewed the kid as uncreative.

If they truly wanted to measure likelihood of success in an advanced program, the best measurement would be whether the kid is advanced based on end-of-year/beginning-of-year tests, DRA, iready, or some other achievement test.

This is true because AAP (and, at least back in the day, TJ also) is actually a program based on your current level of achievement not your ability. High performing but merely sorta smart kid? You'll do great. Low performing genius? You won't actually do that well.

They occasionally ask AAP kids to intuit something slightly complicated about math on the theory that this is how supposedly-gifted brains work, but other than that it's just a program that requires you to want to learn.

But the state mandates something for actually gifted kids, so they have to pretend AAP is that.

Anonymous wrote:The scores is good, OP. It certainly isn't going to hurt your kid. The issue is that they no longer place much emphasis on the scores. The committee takes the GBRS more seriously.

Ultimately it is an advanced program, not a gifted program and, in a way, the GBRS measures the likelihood of success in an advanced program. Clearly kids with strong executive functions do well on GBRS and get into AAP even if their score is in the 120s. If your child scores 140 but has a mediocre GBRS, she won't get in.

It wasn't like this ten-fifteen years ago. Back then, most kids in-pool were pretty much in.

It really doesn't, though. Years ago, my kid tested at multiple years above grade level in all domains and way above the 99th percentile cutoff in both math and reading iready tests. He got perfect scores on the two academic portions of the GBRS, but still got poor scores in the "Creativity" and "Motivation" parts of the GBRS. The teacher only viewed kids as "motivated" if they asked for extra busywork and took a lot of time on coloring sheets. If they instead were studying things on their own or reading very advanced for grade level books, the teacher viewed them as unmotivated. Likewise, if they didn't create pretty artwork, she viewed the kid as uncreative.

If they truly wanted to measure likelihood of success in an advanced program, the best measurement would be whether the kid is advanced based on end-of-year/beginning-of-year tests, DRA, iready, or some other achievement test.

The scores is good, OP. It certainly isn't going to hurt your kid. The issue is that they no longer place much emphasis on the scores. The committee takes the GBRS more seriously.

Ultimately it is an advanced program, not a gifted program and, in a way, the GBRS measures the likelihood of success in an advanced program. Clearly kids with strong executive functions do well on GBRS and get into AAP even if their score is in the 120s. If your child scores 140 but has a mediocre GBRS, she won't get in.

It wasn't like this ten-fifteen years ago. Back then, most kids in-pool were pretty much in.

Anonymous wrote:Our AART rep says they don't have the scores yet. Very odd that they wouldn't be released all at once.

Which school?

Our AART rep says they don't have the scores yet. Very odd that they wouldn't be released all at once.

Nothing yet and nothing in parent view. Why can’t FCPS be fair and give them to everyone at once?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're disappointed that your child is in the 99th percentile?

I’m disappointed in the 135 part.

My other kid was in the 130s and he didn’t get in to AAP.

Because the teacher form (GBRS in the past/HOPE now) can tank or make a kid.

Kids in the 100s can get in with a good form, kids in the 130s won't with a bad one. This has been public info for years.

Prepping doesn't make a difference in the case of a kid in the 130s. Having a good form does.

If this is true, why bother giving students NNAT and Cogat? Why doesn't FCPS just assign students in AAP by teacher's referral

When it was largely based off the CogAt/NNAT/other tests, there was a lot of - maybe too much - prepping. Plus very low diversity in AAP (although it’s still pretty low in some areas). If the criteria was only the teacher forms and no testing, people would find other ways to game the system, plus some teachers would give any kid who wants one a good form and others would be a lot stricter so it could lead to uneven outcomes. Then you’d have “oh I heard Mrs. Blah at X school gives bad AAP recs but Mrs. Blahblah gives good ones and how can I guarantee my kid is in Mrs. Blahblah’s class” and it would be 100x more ridiculous than it is today.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're disappointed that your child is in the 99th percentile?

I’m disappointed in the 135 part.

My other kid was in the 130s and he didn’t get in to AAP.

Because the teacher form (GBRS in the past/HOPE now) can tank or make a kid.

Kids in the 100s can get in with a good form, kids in the 130s won't with a bad one. This has been public info for years.

Prepping doesn't make a difference in the case of a kid in the 130s. Having a good form does.

If this is true, why bother giving students NNAT and Cogat? Why doesn't FCPS just assign students in AAP by teacher's referral

Because the Virginia Board of Education requires they look at multiple factors to determine gifted education eligibility.
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/admincode/title8/agency20/chapter40/section20/

Even if they wanted to they couldn't really change the process. It tracks very closely with state regs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're disappointed that your child is in the 99th percentile?

I’m disappointed in the 135 part.

My other kid was in the 130s and he didn’t get in to AAP.

Because the teacher form (GBRS in the past/HOPE now) can tank or make a kid.

Kids in the 100s can get in with a good form, kids in the 130s won't with a bad one. This has been public info for years.

Prepping doesn't make a difference in the case of a kid in the 130s. Having a good form does.

If this is true, why bother giving students NNAT and Cogat? Why doesn't FCPS just assign students in AAP by teacher's referral

You should really look at the 2020 external report on the FCPS AAP report.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs-aap/review-fairfax-county-public-schools

It makes a few things clear:

1) GBRS (which is filled out by the teacher) is more consequential as to whether or not someone will be AAP Level 4 eligible than either the COGAT or NNAT. COGAT Quantitative seems to be a hair more consequential than the COGAT Verbal for purposes of AAP Level 4 eligibility. In other words, the teacher's view of the student has the strongest weight of any factor.

2) The 2020 report actually recommended eliminating the NNAT, which is further evidence for the devaluation of the NNAT.

3) Race/Ethnicity is also consequential. That is, given the same COGAT/NNAT, students of color are more likely to be AAP Level 4 eligible. This is very pronounced for Black students. That being said, the number of Black students who are referred in the first place is low and so Black students are underrepresented in AAP, relative to their proportion of the total population of students.

So, to answer your question, AAP is basically all about the teacher's referral. The cynic in me says that they've added all these other factors in order to evade any accountability. That is, the teachers don't want angry parents confronting them about their special snowflake. If you want to see this in action, try telling a teacher that he/she is the decisive factor in whether or not your child gets into AAP. The teacher will respond by saying that he/she doesn't decide and that the "committee" decides.

Not PP. This year our 2nd grade teacher made "I don't have any impact on whether your child gets into AAP; the committee decides." the central feature of her Back-to-School Night presentation. Having read the 2020 report, I mentally called B. S. on her; knowing I would refer my kid for AAP I obviously didn't say it out loud.

Are they also posted for you in Parent Vue?

We received special folders yesterday with the letter (usually get folders on Tues), but nothing in Parent Vue yet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're disappointed that your child is in the 99th percentile?

I’m disappointed in the 135 part.

My other kid was in the 130s and he didn’t get in to AAP.

Because the teacher form (GBRS in the past/HOPE now) can tank or make a kid.

Kids in the 100s can get in with a good form, kids in the 130s won't with a bad one. This has been public info for years.

Prepping doesn't make a difference in the case of a kid in the 130s. Having a good form does.

If this is true, why bother giving students NNAT and Cogat? Why doesn't FCPS just assign students in AAP by teacher's referral

You should really look at the 2020 external report on the FCPS AAP report.
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/academic-overview/advanced-academic-programs-aap/review-fairfax-county-public-schools

It makes a few things clear:

1) GBRS (which is filled out by the teacher) is more consequential as to whether or not someone will be AAP Level 4 eligible than either the COGAT or NNAT. COGAT Quantitative seems to be a hair more consequential than the COGAT Verbal for purposes of AAP Level 4 eligibility. In other words, the teacher's view of the student has the strongest weight of any factor.

2) The 2020 report actually recommended eliminating the NNAT, which is further evidence for the devaluation of the NNAT.

3) Race/Ethnicity is also consequential. That is, given the same COGAT/NNAT, students of color are more likely to be AAP Level 4 eligible. This is very pronounced for Black students. That being said, the number of Black students who are referred in the first place is low and so Black students are underrepresented in AAP, relative to their proportion of the total population of students.

So, to answer your question, AAP is basically all about the teacher's referral. The cynic in me says that they've added all these other factors in order to evade any accountability. That is, the teachers don't want angry parents confronting them about their special snowflake. If you want to see this in action, try telling a teacher that he/she is the decisive factor in whether or not your child gets into AAP. The teacher will respond by saying that he/she doesn't decide and that the "committee" decides.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're disappointed that your child is in the 99th percentile?

I’m disappointed in the 135 part.

My other kid was in the 130s and he didn’t get in to AAP.

Because the teacher form (GBRS in the past/HOPE now) can tank or make a kid.

Kids in the 100s can get in with a good form, kids in the 130s won't with a bad one. This has been public info for years.

Prepping doesn't make a difference in the case of a kid in the 130s. Having a good form does.

As for the HOEP scale, can someone help me understand how the social emotional traits help to identify a gifted student. I am talking about the factors listed in FCPS HOPE scale such as:
---- Is sensitive to larger or deeper issues of human concern.
---- Shows compassion for others.
My neighbor old granny has these gifted traits for sure.

I have no idea, but it would have been absolutely horrible for my AAP 6th grader, who has done fabulous in the program.

It will be great for my 2nd grader, who I alternate between thinking absolutely does belong in AAP one minute and 5 minutes later thinking absolutely no.

The HOPE scale seems horrible for your stereotypical quiet, shy, socially awkward smart kid and great for a bubbly outgoing kid who may or may not actually do well in school. I've been assuming AARTs and teachers will manipulate their answers so the kids they think belong in AAP look good regardless.

Anonymous wrote:Yep, came in our parent folder.

Are they also posted for you in Parent Vue?