Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:One saying is that boys' development is slower than girls'. Do we need a gender-adjusted score too?
What about late bloomers? How can we adjust for that?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The whole reason fcps went to fat instead of cogat was to get a real percentile of fcps students in second grade, to get data relevant to fcps. You can't normalize a test on the national level when the universe consists only of fairfax kids. At best you could normalize the test for the FAT, but no guarantee there would be any statistical significance in the need to age adjust. In reality there is no coherence in the cogat and fat. If fcps wanted overinflated data, they would have just kept the old cogat scoring system.
Says the voice of reason in a very unreasonable thread.
Anonymous wrote:The whole reason fcps went to fat instead of cogat was to get a real percentile of fcps students in second grade, to get data relevant to fcps. You can't normalize a test on the national level when the universe consists only of fairfax kids. At best you could normalize the test for the FAT, but no guarantee there would be any statistical significance in the need to age adjust. In reality there is no coherence in the cogat and fat. If fcps wanted overinflated data, they would have just kept the old cogat scoring system.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How about this original idea. Why don't they simply age adjust the test exactly the same way WISC does, the same way the NNAT does, and the same way the national CogAT does, and probably the same way the numerous other standardized national IQ based tests do? How about Fairfax County letting a reputable, established and clinically reviewed testing agency administer, grade, and scale the results? Wow, what a novel idea, letting professionals in the area of IQ testing conduct the process.
Good idea. 130000 kids, $300 each, only $39M/year. Maybe if they sign a 100 year contract, they can get 20% discount. I only take 10% cut for the finders fee.
Unless pp can find a reputable, established and clinically reviewed testing agency do it for peanuts, or better yet for free.
Anonymous wrote:How about this original idea. Why don't they simply age adjust the test exactly the same way WISC does, the same way the NNAT does, and the same way the national CogAT does, and probably the same way the numerous other standardized national IQ based tests do? How about Fairfax County letting a reputable, established and clinically reviewed testing agency administer, grade, and scale the results? Wow, what a novel idea, letting professionals in the area of IQ testing conduct the process.
Anonymous wrote:One saying is that boys' development is slower than girls'. Do we need a gender-adjusted score too?
Anonymous wrote:What is redshirt?