Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think GBRS and school submitted samples play a very important role. Dare I say more important than Cogat it seems!
I agree, but I think it's absurd. Good work samples are more likely to show high executive function than high intelligence. Likewise, there are many things that bias GBRS. The system is set up to select upper middle class, above average kids who are somewhat advanced. This is actually a good fit for the program, since AAP itself best serves exactly those kids. It's weird, though, that a program that is supposed to serve gifted kids fails to identify a bunch of them, and then falls far short of serving their needs when they are in the program. It's also odd that the schools keep harping about the achievement gap, but then continue changing AAP admissions in a way that is likely to admit even more already privileged kids.
Problem is that CogAT is not the best measure of identifying gifted child either. None of the measures are perfect anyways. CogAT can be easily prepped and kids in 120's can be easily prepped to get 130's.
Which is why they use the NNAT, CoGAT, GBRSs, and Work Samples. They should give the committee a more complete picture of the kids under review. If you add in the parent questionnaire, parent provided work samples, and awards/letters of recommendation. The process is not perfect. There are different groups of 5 that review packets who have different ideas about what should be weighted and what is important. That is why the appeal can be useful. It is a different group of people looking at the packet and with affirming or changing the original decision.
The program is what it is. Most of the people I know who had kids go through it thought it was a solid program and their kids enjoyed it. The only negative I have heard some people mention is that it is not the greatest social experience at the Center schools. It sounds like at our Center that the kids end up segregating by their base school. But no one has said that the academic portion is too slow or problematic. There is a small group of parents who seem to think that it moves too slowly. I suspect a good number of those parents have had their kids in some type of after school tutoring for a few years. The material feels slow because their kids are ahead due to the tutoring programs. I get that impression from the posts I have seen on this site and talking to some of my friends whose kids are at different schools.
True, I know many kids from AAP go to some sort of after school enrichment. The one my son goes for math is a probably couple of months ahead his AAP in terms of concepts learned, but has more depth and repetition. The program primarily relies on home work packets with very little instruction. He generally finds this after school math challenging and I help him out frequently, but then he finds school math easy - probably because he learned the concepts already. However, if the kid is not in AAP, this program might be too far ahead of the class and might be very difficult for the kids. Personally, I think a strong foundation in math is very important and I would recommend it if the kid can take it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think GBRS and school submitted samples play a very important role. Dare I say more important than Cogat it seems!
I agree, but I think it's absurd. Good work samples are more likely to show high executive function than high intelligence. Likewise, there are many things that bias GBRS. The system is set up to select upper middle class, above average kids who are somewhat advanced. This is actually a good fit for the program, since AAP itself best serves exactly those kids. It's weird, though, that a program that is supposed to serve gifted kids fails to identify a bunch of them, and then falls far short of serving their needs when they are in the program. It's also odd that the schools keep harping about the achievement gap, but then continue changing AAP admissions in a way that is likely to admit even more already privileged kids.
Problem is that CogAT is not the best measure of identifying gifted child either. None of the measures are perfect anyways. CogAT can be easily prepped and kids in 120's can be easily prepped to get 130's.
Which is why they use the NNAT, CoGAT, GBRSs, and Work Samples. They should give the committee a more complete picture of the kids under review. If you add in the parent questionnaire, parent provided work samples, and awards/letters of recommendation. The process is not perfect. There are different groups of 5 that review packets who have different ideas about what should be weighted and what is important. That is why the appeal can be useful. It is a different group of people looking at the packet and with affirming or changing the original decision.
The program is what it is. Most of the people I know who had kids go through it thought it was a solid program and their kids enjoyed it. The only negative I have heard some people mention is that it is not the greatest social experience at the Center schools. It sounds like at our Center that the kids end up segregating by their base school. But no one has said that the academic portion is too slow or problematic. There is a small group of parents who seem to think that it moves too slowly. I suspect a good number of those parents have had their kids in some type of after school tutoring for a few years. The material feels slow because their kids are ahead due to the tutoring programs. I get that impression from the posts I have seen on this site and talking to some of my friends whose kids are at different schools.
Anonymous wrote:The sooner the better
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think GBRS and school submitted samples play a very important role. Dare I say more important than Cogat it seems!
I agree, but I think it's absurd. Good work samples are more likely to show high executive function than high intelligence. Likewise, there are many things that bias GBRS. The system is set up to select upper middle class, above average kids who are somewhat advanced. This is actually a good fit for the program, since AAP itself best serves exactly those kids. It's weird, though, that a program that is supposed to serve gifted kids fails to identify a bunch of them, and then falls far short of serving their needs when they are in the program. It's also odd that the schools keep harping about the achievement gap, but then continue changing AAP admissions in a way that is likely to admit even more already privileged kids.
Problem is that CogAT is not the best measure of identifying gifted child either. None of the measures are perfect anyways. CogAT can be easily prepped and kids in 120's can be easily prepped to get 130's.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think GBRS and school submitted samples play a very important role. Dare I say more important than Cogat it seems!
I agree, but I think it's absurd. Good work samples are more likely to show high executive function than high intelligence. Likewise, there are many things that bias GBRS. The system is set up to select upper middle class, above average kids who are somewhat advanced. This is actually a good fit for the program, since AAP itself best serves exactly those kids. It's weird, though, that a program that is supposed to serve gifted kids fails to identify a bunch of them, and then falls far short of serving their needs when they are in the program. It's also odd that the schools keep harping about the achievement gap, but then continue changing AAP admissions in a way that is likely to admit even more already privileged kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Actually, I find the whole AAP system ridiculous. Most of the kids are indistinguishable from bright gen ed kids. Aside from advanced math, AAP is not very different from gen ed. Seems silly to have a special label, busing to a new school, and all of this drama for a very mildly accelerated program.
I agree. We’ve since moved and dc is in a good private school taking geometry in 6th grade. I come to the AAP forum to read the absurd overreactions by parents of “actual gifted kids”. You are in an advanced academic program that looks like the ed in other better districts around the country. If you truly have an “actual gifted kid” you should know you need to advocate for their needs.
Anonymous wrote:Actually, I find the whole AAP system ridiculous. Most of the kids are indistinguishable from bright gen ed kids. Aside from advanced math, AAP is not very different from gen ed. Seems silly to have a special label, busing to a new school, and all of this drama for a very mildly accelerated program.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
So true. I was talking to a few neighbors and all of their bright kids got in with "low scores" as well. It is an advanced program, after all. My kid is crazy bright and always has been. Not saying my kid belongs in Mensa or anything but I am glad test scores are not the only factor.
You have a bizarre definition of "crazy bright." This thread really illustrates why my gifted kid is so bored in AAP. He's stuck twiddling his thumbs and waiting for all of the "crazy bright kids"to learn the concepts and catch up.
Haha! I absolutely love it. My “crazy bright” kid will be running circles around your “bored kid”!!! And I’ll be smiling the whole time.
Have a great day!
LOL. No. Just no. The teachers have said that they can't extend up for my kid, because they have to focus on the masses rather than the top kids. He gets straight 4s and pass advanced on everything without lifting a finger. I don't begrudge parents of bright kids for getting them into AAP, as it is now mostly filled with bright kids. It's unfortunate that FCPS is meeting the letter of the state gifted mandate law but not at all the spirit of the law.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
So true. I was talking to a few neighbors and all of their bright kids got in with "low scores" as well. It is an advanced program, after all. My kid is crazy bright and always has been. Not saying my kid belongs in Mensa or anything but I am glad test scores are not the only factor.
You have a bizarre definition of "crazy bright." This thread really illustrates why my gifted kid is so bored in AAP. He's stuck twiddling his thumbs and waiting for all of the "crazy bright kids"to learn the concepts and catch up.
Haha! I absolutely love it. My “crazy bright” kid will be running circles around your “bored kid”!!! And I’ll be smiling the whole time.
Have a great day!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
So true. I was talking to a few neighbors and all of their bright kids got in with "low scores" as well. It is an advanced program, after all. My kid is crazy bright and always has been. Not saying my kid belongs in Mensa or anything but I am glad test scores are not the only factor.
You have a bizarre definition of "crazy bright." This thread really illustrates why my gifted kid is so bored in AAP. He's stuck twiddling his thumbs and waiting for all of the "crazy bright kids"to learn the concepts and catch up.