Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:^ well I'm starting to see why some posters are so critical of the program. Obviously it's not for the really advanced anymore.
Nice try, you sad troll. Test scores are just one or two data points, important and objective, but not the whole picture and were provided in direct response to thread's question w/o a lot of exclamations and excitement.
Parents who did post - thanks for meaningfully contributing to the forum.
huh? FSIQ of 123 and GBRS 12 or 13 is gifted now? I'm not a troll, in fact have relentlessly defended the program against the couple of critics who keep arguing it has spiraled out of control, but when you see data like this you understand their argument.
BUT it's not a gifted program. Its Advanced Academics, to respond to the last few posters, why not put your child in AAP if they can do the work?? Your problem should be with the system, not with the parents who know their children can do AAP and work within the system to get them into it. It's not these parents' fault that the county did away with GT and decided to include more kids. Sometimes I have to wonder why some parents DON'T try to get their kids in.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:^ well I'm starting to see why some posters are so critical of the program. Obviously it's not for the really advanced anymore.
Nice try, you sad troll. Test scores are just one or two data points, important and objective, but not the whole picture and were provided in direct response to thread's question w/o a lot of exclamations and excitement.
Parents who did post - thanks for meaningfully contributing to the forum.
huh? FSIQ of 123 and GBRS 12 or 13 is gifted now? I'm not a troll, in fact have relentlessly defended the program against the couple of critics who keep arguing it has spiraled out of control, but when you see data like this you understand their argument.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:^ well I'm starting to see why some posters are so critical of the program. Obviously it's not for the really advanced anymore.
Nice try, you sad troll. Test scores are just one or two data points, important and objective, but not the whole picture and were provided in direct response to thread's question w/o a lot of exclamations and excitement.
Parents who did post - thanks for meaningfully contributing to the forum.
Anonymous wrote:If you're pro-AAP do you think the program is watered down by high-average students like the above?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Received letters today for my 2 children - both IN. Letters dated June 20; envelopes postmarked June 25.
Child 1 (rising 4th grader - did not refer last year bc didn't think she was ready, but she did exceptionally well this year in Level III):
VCI 121
PRI 123
WMI 102
PSI 121
FSIQ 123
GBRS 13
Child 2 (rising 3rd grader)
VCI 126
PRI 123
WMI 113
PSI 109
FSIQ 124
GBRS 12
I'm the poster of the above. I was VERY hesitant to post the scores bc I knew there would be negative reactions to my kids' WISC scores - and who wants to hear that? But I decided to post bc I I knew not everyone's kids were getting 130+ - those w/ lower scores were probably just scared to post bc of the inevitable mean comments. Would I suggest that your kid is inferior bc they got a low GBRS? Actually, no, I wouldn't. I know kids learn differently, test differently, behave differently. There is no formula for what makes a kid "it".
The AAP committee is not just looking at the test scores. Isn't that obvious when people write that their kid got a 140 on the WISC, but didn't get in?
Both of my kids have consistently been in the TOP word study and math groups. Their reports cards are mostly 4s, a few 3s - sometimes all 4s (the only 2 has been in organization for my older one). My older one was Level III this past year in 3rd grade (advanced math and reading) - her teacher has said she didn't understand why my daughter wasn't in AAP from the beginning (as mentioned above, we didn't refer last year bc we didn't think she was ready).
With both appeals, we included 10 work samples each (5 pages, 2 samples per page). These samples included advanced math word problems, poetry, simple machine blueprint, written responses to social studies exams, etc. We also included letters citing VERY specific examples of questions they asked us or their teachers, info they have told us, etc. Both appeals files were very strong and I would've been surprised if they hadn't been accepted.
So, to answer those who are questioning whether my kids (or other similarly scored kids) belong in AAP with their "low" scores of Superior, YES, they do. And the AAP committee obviously agrees.
Anonymous wrote:^ well I'm starting to see why some posters are so critical of the program. Obviously it's not for the really advanced anymore.
Anonymous wrote:Received letters today for my 2 children - both IN. Letters dated June 20; envelopes postmarked June 25.
Child 1 (rising 4th grader - did not refer last year bc didn't think she was ready, but she did exceptionally well this year in Level III):
VCI 121
PRI 123
WMI 102
PSI 121
FSIQ 123
GBRS 13
Child 2 (rising 3rd grader)
VCI 126
PRI 123
WMI 113
PSI 109
FSIQ 124
GBRS 12
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Received letters today for my 2 children - both IN. Letters dated June 20; envelopes postmarked June 25.
Child 1 (rising 4th grader - did not refer last year bc didn't think she was ready, but she did exceptionally well this year in Level III):
VCI 121
PRI 123
WMI 102
PSI 121
FSIQ 123
GBRS 13
Child 2 (rising 3rd grader)
VCI 126
PRI 123
WMI 113
PSI 109
FSIQ 124
GBRS 12
Have to say, hard to see the argument for why either of these children NEED AAP. Agree with PP, scores don't seem to matter at all on appeals.