Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NNAT 128
COGAT 126
GBRS 8

DC was not found eligible in the first round, appealed with WISC 128 (97%) and recommendation letters and got denied again.

Details of WISC - Full Scale 128 - 97%
Verbal Comprehension 88%
Visual Spatial 97%
Fluid Reasoning 94%
Working Memory 68%
Processing Speed 63%

I wonder if, when the committee sees high scores as above, coupled with moderate/low processing speed -- if they suspect prepping.

Not suggesting that you did or didn't prep -- just wondering if that is what the committee is thinking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NNAT 128
COGAT 126
GBRS 8

DC was not found eligible in the first round, appealed with WISC 128 (97%) and recommendation letters and got denied again.

Details of WISC - Full Scale 128 - 97%
Verbal Comprehension 88%
Visual Spatial 97%
Fluid Reasoning 94%
Working Memory 68%
Processing Speed 63%

I wonder if, when the committee sees high scores as above, coupled with moderate/low processing speed -- if they suspect prepping.

Not suggesting that you did or didn't prep -- just wondering if that is what the committee is thinking.

Anonymous wrote:NNAT 128
COGAT 126
GBRS 8

DC was not found eligible in the first round, appealed with WISC 128 (97%) and recommendation letters and got denied again.

Details of WISC - Full Scale 128 - 97%
Verbal Comprehension 88%
Visual Spatial 97%
Fluid Reasoning 94%
Working Memory 68%
Processing Speed 63%

Anonymous wrote:
Were your kids also the same age when taking the COGAT? It's also age-normed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They may meet and discuss it has a panel but the AART fills it out. I know my DC teacher was shocked when I showed her the GBRS. It clearly wasn't what she recommended. Additionally the work samples submitted were so bad it had to be intentional.

Perhaps, there is truth in what you are saying. Maybe you can answer this question? After analyzing posted results here I am seeing the trend where Cogat/NNAT/GBRS are average or below and WISC and/or SB high. I understand there are exceptions to this scenario (ADHD, 2e, hoarding) but every poster child cant be falling in that category (neither they have reported issues with child with few exceptions). Almost all posts complaints about low GBRS, if grades are high there is no way school can give GBRS of 6!

Why there is such huge dependencies (Cogat/NNAT/GBRS vs IQ tests) in scores for all most all the reported scores in appeal process? something doesn't add up?

It's not that uncommon for a child who is above grade level in all subjects and is a straight 4 student to still receive a low-ish GBRS. Some schools will justify this by stating that the student is high achieving, but not displaying the gifted characteristics that they want to see. Many people have posted about exactly this situation over the last few years.

I haven't seen CogATs or NNATs that are average or below with high WISCs. I have seen a lot of 120-ish CogATs with high WISCs. That is easily explained. The CogAT rewards convergent thinking and not divergent thinking, so many gifted kids overthink the problems and get them wrong. The CogAT also has a very low ceiling, such that one or two mistakes can make a huge difference. This can really hurt kids who tend to be a little careless. The CogAT verbal section is read to the kids, and all of the answers are pictures rather than words. Kids who struggle with listening, staying on pace with the teacher, or interpreting the pictures will get artificially low scores. Since the CogAT is completely multiple choice, 1-2 lucky or unlucky guesses can make a huge difference in scores. My kid who scored a 140 composite on the CogAT only had 4 more correct answers out of the 150+ questions than my kid who scored a 128.

With the WISC, kids have the opportunity to explain their answers, which means that divergent thinkers will be rewarded, and kids who tend to jump the gun may figure out the correct answer in the process of trying to explain things. The WISC also covers a broader range of skill sets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^There have been numerous studies that have shown that teachers are less likely to "see" giftedness in black or Hispanic children than they are for similar white and Asian children.

PP who appealed. I didn't want to say this, but yeah. This.

Our school also has one annual goal, reducing the performance gap for black children. We have a small black population like 5 percent, so this might play a role. My kid was performing well on the i-ready and I imagine they saw a compliant, good student who they could use for that purpose. I don't think that fair since my child has a right to an education based on her own needs and a right to access whatever services she's entitled to that is offered by the county. I sniffed that out in my conversations with people at the school, but it's a good reminder to black or latino parents. We have to be super careful.

Another fun, awesome thing about the black experience in America. Sigh.

you are incoherent, and make no sense. you might as well just spare your explanation.

I had no trouble understanding her. Maybe you should read it again.

I couldn't understand either! Maybe its just me

I can explain it as a FCPS teacher. The school was hoarding their bright black children. The admin made the decision that looking better was more important than giving up 25 percent of your black children population to an AAP center. It's crazy but happens all the time.

Listen, FCPS is a machine. And in terms of understanding why a kid who would benefit and qualify for AAP is not allowed to go...there is a reason. It's because that kid has value to the base. Which is ironically the reason why the child needs AAP...

And that is why the appeal process and WISC testing needs to be promoted more. I teach at an upper elementary grade where the pressure isn't so bad. I have sent so, so many children to the center who qualified based on test scores, but were tanked on the GBRS.

I understood gbrs to be decided by a panel. Are they discussing things of this sort or is everyone silently making the same calculation?

They may meet and discuss it has a panel but the AART fills it out. I know my DC teacher was shocked when I showed her the GBRS. It clearly wasn't what she recommended. Additionally the work samples submitted were so bad it had to be intentional.

Perhaps, there is truth in what you are saying. Maybe you can answer this question? After analyzing posted results here I am seeing the trend where Cogat/NNAT/GBRS are average or below and WISC and/or SB high. I understand there are exceptions to this scenario (ADHD, 2e, hoarding) but every poster child cant be falling in that category (neither they have reported issues with child with few exceptions). Almost all posts complaints about low GBRS, if grades are high there is no way school can give GBRS of 6!

Why there is such huge dependencies (Cogat/NNAT/GBRS vs IQ tests) in scores for all most all the reported scores in appeal process? something doesn't add up?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They may meet and discuss it has a panel but the AART fills it out. I know my DC teacher was shocked when I showed her the GBRS. It clearly wasn't what she recommended. Additionally the work samples submitted were so bad it had to be intentional.

Perhaps, there is truth in what you are saying. Maybe you can answer this question? After analyzing posted results here I am seeing the trend where Cogat/NNAT/GBRS are average or below and WISC and/or SB high. I understand there are exceptions to this scenario (ADHD, 2e, hoarding) but every poster child cant be falling in that category (neither they have reported issues with child with few exceptions). Almost all posts complaints about low GBRS, if grades are high there is no way school can give GBRS of 6!

Why there is such huge dependencies (Cogat/NNAT/GBRS vs IQ tests) in scores for all most all the reported scores in appeal process? something doesn't add up?

It's not that uncommon for a child who is above grade level in all subjects and is a straight 4 student to still receive a low-ish GBRS. Some schools will justify this by stating that the student is high achieving, but not displaying the gifted characteristics that they want to see. Many people have posted about exactly this situation over the last few years.

I haven't seen CogATs or NNATs that are average or below with high WISCs. I have seen a lot of 120-ish CogATs with high WISCs. That is easily explained. The CogAT rewards convergent thinking and not divergent thinking, so many gifted kids overthink the problems and get them wrong. The CogAT also has a very low ceiling, such that one or two mistakes can make a huge difference. This can really hurt kids who tend to be a little careless. The CogAT verbal section is read to the kids, and all of the answers are pictures rather than words. Kids who struggle with listening, staying on pace with the teacher, or interpreting the pictures will get artificially low scores. Since the CogAT is completely multiple choice, 1-2 lucky or unlucky guesses can make a huge difference in scores. My kid who scored a 140 composite on the CogAT only had 4 more correct answers out of the 150+ questions than my kid who scored a 128.

With the WISC, kids have the opportunity to explain their answers, which means that divergent thinkers will be rewarded, and kids who tend to jump the gun may figure out the correct answer in the process of trying to explain things. The WISC also covers a broader range of skill sets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They may meet and discuss it has a panel but the AART fills it out. I know my DC teacher was shocked when I showed her the GBRS. It clearly wasn't what she recommended. Additionally the work samples submitted were so bad it had to be intentional.

Perhaps, there is truth in what you are saying. Maybe you can answer this question? After analyzing posted results here I am seeing the trend where Cogat/NNAT/GBRS are average or below and WISC and/or SB high. I understand there are exceptions to this scenario (ADHD, 2e, hoarding) but every poster child cant be falling in that category (neither they have reported issues with child with few exceptions). Almost all posts complaints about low GBRS, if grades are high there is no way school can give GBRS of 6!

Why there is such huge dependencies (Cogat/NNAT/GBRS vs IQ tests) in scores for all most all the reported scores in appeal process? something doesn't add up?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^There have been numerous studies that have shown that teachers are less likely to "see" giftedness in black or Hispanic children than they are for similar white and Asian children.

PP who appealed. I didn't want to say this, but yeah. This.

Our school also has one annual goal, reducing the performance gap for black children. We have a small black population like 5 percent, so this might play a role. My kid was performing well on the i-ready and I imagine they saw a compliant, good student who they could use for that purpose. I don't think that fair since my child has a right to an education based on her own needs and a right to access whatever services she's entitled to that is offered by the county. I sniffed that out in my conversations with people at the school, but it's a good reminder to black or latino parents. We have to be super careful.

Another fun, awesome thing about the black experience in America. Sigh.

you are incoherent, and make no sense. you might as well just spare your explanation.

I had no trouble understanding her. Maybe you should read it again.

I couldn't understand either! Maybe its just me

I can explain it as a FCPS teacher. The school was hoarding their bright black children. The admin made the decision that looking better was more important than giving up 25 percent of your black children population to an AAP center. It's crazy but happens all the time.

Listen, FCPS is a machine. And in terms of understanding why a kid who would benefit and qualify for AAP is not allowed to go...there is a reason. It's because that kid has value to the base. Which is ironically the reason why the child needs AAP...

And that is why the appeal process and WISC testing needs to be promoted more. I teach at an upper elementary grade where the pressure isn't so bad. I have sent so, so many children to the center who qualified based on test scores, but were tanked on the GBRS.

It’s a super small sample size in this thread - are there even 10 people posting?

I understood gbrs to be decided by a panel. Are they discussing things of this sort or is everyone silently making the same calculation?

They may meet and discuss it has a panel but the AART fills it out. I know my DC teacher was shocked when I showed her the GBRS. It clearly wasn't what she recommended. Additionally the work samples submitted were so bad it had to be intentional.

Perhaps, there is truth in what you are saying. Maybe you can answer this question? After analyzing posted results here I am seeing the trend where Cogat/NNAT/GBRS are average or below and WISC and/or SB high. I understand there are exceptions to this scenario (ADHD, 2e, hoarding) but every poster child cant be falling in that category (neither they have reported issues with child with few exceptions). Almost all posts complaints about low GBRS, if grades are high there is no way school can give GBRS of 6!

Why there is such huge dependencies (Cogat/NNAT/GBRS vs IQ tests) in scores for all most all the reported scores in appeal process? something doesn't add up?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^There have been numerous studies that have shown that teachers are less likely to "see" giftedness in black or Hispanic children than they are for similar white and Asian children.

PP who appealed. I didn't want to say this, but yeah. This.

Our school also has one annual goal, reducing the performance gap for black children. We have a small black population like 5 percent, so this might play a role. My kid was performing well on the i-ready and I imagine they saw a compliant, good student who they could use for that purpose. I don't think that fair since my child has a right to an education based on her own needs and a right to access whatever services she's entitled to that is offered by the county. I sniffed that out in my conversations with people at the school, but it's a good reminder to black or latino parents. We have to be super careful.

Another fun, awesome thing about the black experience in America. Sigh.

you are incoherent, and make no sense. you might as well just spare your explanation.

I had no trouble understanding her. Maybe you should read it again.

I couldn't understand either! Maybe its just me

I can explain it as a FCPS teacher. The school was hoarding their bright black children. The admin made the decision that looking better was more important than giving up 25 percent of your black children population to an AAP center. It's crazy but happens all the time.

Listen, FCPS is a machine. And in terms of understanding why a kid who would benefit and qualify for AAP is not allowed to go...there is a reason. It's because that kid has value to the base. Which is ironically the reason why the child needs AAP...

And that is why the appeal process and WISC testing needs to be promoted more. I teach at an upper elementary grade where the pressure isn't so bad. I have sent so, so many children to the center who qualified based on test scores, but were tanked on the GBRS.

I understood gbrs to be decided by a panel. Are they discussing things of this sort or is everyone silently making the same calculation?

They may meet and discuss it has a panel but the AART fills it out. I know my DC teacher was shocked when I showed her the GBRS. It clearly wasn't what she recommended. Additionally the work samples submitted were so bad it had to be intentional.

Perhaps, there is truth in what you are saying. Maybe you can answer this question? After analyzing posted results here I am seeing the trend where Cogat/NNAT/GBRS are average or below and WISC and/or SB high. I understand there are exceptions to this scenario (ADHD, 2e, hoarding) but every poster child cant be falling in that category (neither they have reported issues with their child minus with few exceptions). Almost all posts complaints about low GBRS, if grades are high there is no way school can give GBRS of 6!

Why there is such huge descrepencies (Cogat/NNAT/GBRS vs IQ tests) in scores for all most all the reported scores in appeal process? something doesn't add up?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^There have been numerous studies that have shown that teachers are less likely to "see" giftedness in black or Hispanic children than they are for similar white and Asian children.

PP who appealed. I didn't want to say this, but yeah. This.

Our school also has one annual goal, reducing the performance gap for black children. We have a small black population like 5 percent, so this might play a role. My kid was performing well on the i-ready and I imagine they saw a compliant, good student who they could use for that purpose. I don't think that fair since my child has a right to an education based on her own needs and a right to access whatever services she's entitled to that is offered by the county. I sniffed that out in my conversations with people at the school, but it's a good reminder to black or latino parents. We have to be super careful.

Another fun, awesome thing about the black experience in America. Sigh.

you are incoherent, and make no sense. you might as well just spare your explanation.

I had no trouble understanding her. Maybe you should read it again.

I couldn't understand either! Maybe its just me

I can explain it as a FCPS teacher. The school was hoarding their bright black children. The admin made the decision that looking better was more important than giving up 25 percent of your black children population to an AAP center. It's crazy but happens all the time.

Listen, FCPS is a machine. And in terms of understanding why a kid who would benefit and qualify for AAP is not allowed to go...there is a reason. It's because that kid has value to the base. Which is ironically the reason why the child needs AAP...

And that is why the appeal process and WISC testing needs to be promoted more. I teach at an upper elementary grade where the pressure isn't so bad. I have sent so, so many children to the center who qualified based on test scores, but were tanked on the GBRS.

I understood gbrs to be decided by a panel. Are they discussing things of this sort or is everyone silently making the same calculation?

They may meet and discuss it has a panel but the AART fills it out. I know my DC teacher was shocked when I showed her the GBRS. It clearly wasn't what she recommended. Additionally the work samples submitted were so bad it had to be intentional.