Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you, OP!!

My kid's scores are surprising too. Highest on nonverbal, which is traditionally a family weakness (96). 90% on verbal and 93 on quant. Composite score 128.

Why on earth are these baffling? 90s aren’t weakness. Someone is saying their kid is in the 50s and you come in saying “me too!” Is it just to make the other feel bad?

No, not at all. I'm just saying that historically my children's nonverbal scores are their lowest.

It seems that NGAT wasn't either designed or administered properly. Looking at the other posters' comments, it seems that the score discrepancy between categories is more than one should normally expect.

NP here. Also a composite of 128 isn't that good. My 3rd grade DC was rejected from full time AAP with that score on Cogat and NNAT. So, if you're hoping your child will get into AAP, it is s disappointing score.

If your definition of a good score is only one in the 98th or 99th percentile then you are failing as a parent. I can understand being disappointed that your child is not accepted into something like AAP but saying that a 97th percentile score is disappointing is a sign that you need to rethink how you are evaluating your child.

That is like saying that a kid who has a 5.0 GPA, 14 AP exams with a score of 5 and not being accepted to MIT is a failure because they didn't get into MIT.

If you are legitimately arguing that a sub 97th percentile "isn't good" then please take some deep breaths and rethink how you are framing your childs abilities.

This is the AAP forum, and far and above the main reason anyone is on this forum reading about NGAT is for its relevance to the AAP application. Obviously I know my child is extremely bright and has a bright future. And we're very proud of her and would never let her see any disappointment in us regarding how she does on standardized tests. But that's all the more reason I was disappointed she didn't have a 99th percentile score on these tests so she could be with other very bright, eager learners who benefit from challenges and extensions in the curriculum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you, OP!!

My kid's scores are surprising too. Highest on nonverbal, which is traditionally a family weakness (96). 90% on verbal and 93 on quant. Composite score 128.

Why on earth are these baffling? 90s aren’t weakness. Someone is saying their kid is in the 50s and you come in saying “me too!” Is it just to make the other feel bad?

No, not at all. I'm just saying that historically my children's nonverbal scores are their lowest.

It seems that NGAT wasn't either designed or administered properly. Looking at the other posters' comments, it seems that the score discrepancy between categories is more than one should normally expect.

NP here. Also a composite of 128 isn't that good. My 3rd grade DC was rejected from full time AAP with that score on Cogat and NNAT. So, if you're hoping your child will get into AAP, it is s disappointing score.

If your definition of a good score is only one in the 98th or 99th percentile then you are failing as a parent. I can understand being disappointed that your child is not accepted into something like AAP but saying that a 97th percentile score is disappointing is a sign that you need to rethink how you are evaluating your child.

That is like saying that a kid who has a 5.0 GPA, 14 AP exams with a score of 5 and not being accepted to MIT is a failure because they didn't get into MIT.

If you are legitimately arguing that a sub 97th percentile "isn't good" then please take some deep breaths and rethink how you are framing your childs abilities.

This is the AAP forum, and far and above the main reason anyone is on this forum reading about NGAT is for its relevance to the AAP application. Obviously I know my child is extremely bright and has a bright future. And we're very proud of her and would never let her see any disappointment in us regarding how she does on standardized tests. But that's all the more reason I was disappointed she didn't have a 99th percentile score on these tests so she could be with other very bright, eager learners who benefit from challenges and extensions in the curriculum.

Anonymous wrote:does anybody have a composite score of greater than 160?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you, OP!!

My kid's scores are surprising too. Highest on nonverbal, which is traditionally a family weakness (96). 90% on verbal and 93 on quant. Composite score 128.

Why on earth are these baffling? 90s aren’t weakness. Someone is saying their kid is in the 50s and you come in saying “me too!” Is it just to make the other feel bad?

No, not at all. I'm just saying that historically my children's nonverbal scores are their lowest.

It seems that NGAT wasn't either designed or administered properly. Looking at the other posters' comments, it seems that the score discrepancy between categories is more than one should normally expect.

NP here. Also a composite of 128 isn't that good. My 3rd grade DC was rejected from full time AAP with that score on Cogat and NNAT. So, if you're hoping your child will get into AAP, it is s disappointing score.

If your definition of a good score is only one in the 98th or 99th percentile then you are failing as a parent. I can understand being disappointed that your child is not accepted into something like AAP but saying that a 97th percentile score is disappointing is a sign that you need to rethink how you are evaluating your child.

That is like saying that a kid who has a 5.0 GPA, 14 AP exams with a score of 5 and not being accepted to MIT is a failure because they didn't get into MIT.

If you are legitimately arguing that a sub 97th percentile "isn't good" then please take some deep breaths and rethink how you are framing your childs abilities.

Anonymous wrote:My kid had such a discrepancy on CogAT scores back in the day that the test flagged it as a potential error. Nope - she's just truly bad at the stuff that CogAT NV tested for. Spacial representation is truly not her thing. And she's really good at the stuff Q & V tested for. Discrepancies happen on any test with multiple sections for some kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I normally goggle for percentiles and info on the test.

Did that and found very little. Did you have more luck?

https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/77c18b49-7274-496f-808f-8c46bb4fb3a7/downloads/092120f0-1877-479c-9aae-047eedf53744/Gifted%201%20hour%20w%202E.pdf?ver=1764015314240
(pdf page 14 or slide #28)
It shows a sample report (more informative than the FCPS version that we just got). I think it implies that the "Total score" (composite) also maps to a same-shaped distribution (with mean 100 and sd 15).
In other words, Total Score 130 (mean+ 2sd ) ~ 97..h percentile and 135 (mean+ 2.33*sd) ~ 99th percentile.

Helpful. So in pool will likely be somewhere in the 130s, and a kid with a 135+ will probably be safely in pool in the better school pyramids?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So disappointed in these test results. I don’t know why they couldn’t just stick with Cogat when it was working perfectly fine.

Because parents were prepping their kids and the results could not be trusted. They are looking for a test that actually can be used to differentiate and not have to guess at which kids were prepped and which kids were not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I normally goggle for percentiles and info on the test.

Did that and found very little. Did you have more luck?

https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/77c18b49-7274-496f-808f-8c46bb4fb3a7/downloads/092120f0-1877-479c-9aae-047eedf53744/Gifted%201%20hour%20w%202E.pdf?ver=1764015314240
(pdf page 14 or slide #28)
It shows a sample report (more informative than the FCPS version that we just got). I think it implies that the "Total score" (composite) also maps to a same-shaped distribution (with mean 100 and sd 15).
In other words, Total Score 130 (mean+ 2sd ) ~ 97..h percentile and 135 (mean+ 2.33*sd) ~ 99th percentile.

Helpful. So in pool will likely be somewhere in the 130s, and a kid with a 135+ will probably be safely in pool in the better school pyramids?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you, OP!!

My kid's scores are surprising too. Highest on nonverbal, which is traditionally a family weakness (96). 90% on verbal and 93 on quant. Composite score 128.

Why on earth are these baffling? 90s aren’t weakness. Someone is saying their kid is in the 50s and you come in saying “me too!” Is it just to make the other feel bad?

No, not at all. I'm just saying that historically my children's nonverbal scores are their lowest.

It seems that NGAT wasn't either designed or administered properly. Looking at the other posters' comments, it seems that the score discrepancy between categories is more than one should normally expect.

NP here. Also a composite of 128 isn't that good. My 3rd grade DC was rejected from full time AAP with that score on Cogat and NNAT. So, if you're hoping your child will get into AAP, it is s disappointing score.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you, OP!!

My kid's scores are surprising too. Highest on nonverbal, which is traditionally a family weakness (96). 90% on verbal and 93 on quant. Composite score 128.

Why on earth are these baffling? 90s aren’t weakness. Someone is saying their kid is in the 50s and you come in saying “me too!” Is it just to make the other feel bad?

No, not at all. I'm just saying that historically my children's nonverbal scores are their lowest.

It seems that NGAT wasn't either designed or administered properly. Looking at the other posters' comments, it seems that the score discrepancy between categories is more than one should normally expect.

NP here. Also a composite of 128 isn't that good. My 3rd grade DC was rejected from full time AAP with that score on Cogat and NNAT. So, if you're hoping your child will get into AAP, it is s disappointing score.