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:

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?

I decent understanding of giftedness or a look at hoagies will tell you GIFTED children (not advanced) often do poorly on group test. So that could explain low CogAT/NNAT and high IQ test. Also, my experience as a mother of 2 children, defined as profoundly gifted (children with IQs above 145), is that FCPS AARTs and staff have no concept of gifted behaviors. They look for academically advanced behaviors and not gifted ones, which explains the low GBRS and high IQs.

Both of my children did "eh" on the school administered tests (neither scored above 132) and had GBRS below 10. I had to appeal for both to get into AAP. DC 1 has an IQ of 150. DC2 has an IQ of 148. DC 1 is 7th grade now. She took the SAT in 6th grade because she needed to to get into a special programs for talented youth and scored a 1300 in 6th grade. Yes, the child AAP said wasn't gifted scored better than many kids trying to get into college, when she was in 6th grade. SAT is a group test, but with age she got better at taking group tests. DC 2 is in second and just got in on appeal. I expect great things from him despite the teachers not thinking he was anything to write home about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Same PP, but I wanted to add:
The GBRS tanked this kid. The same scores with a good GBRS would have been IN. While all of the scores are strong, none of them are standout scores, and apparently none of them are enough to overcome that GBRS of 8.

Sadly, I agree. My DD had lower scores than this child's on NNAT and CogAT and an 8 GBRS. She got in first round with a FSIQ of 141. Without that she wouldn't be in. She's in 5th now. She's done well-ish but does struggle with writing.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Same PP, but I wanted to add:
The GBRS tanked this kid. The same scores with a good GBRS would have been IN. While all of the scores are strong, none of them are standout scores, and apparently none of them are enough to overcome that GBRS of 8.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

NP, but if the committee suspects that, then they're morons completely unqualified to do their jobs. The WMI and PSI subtests are the most straightforward and would be the easiest by far to prep. Practicing fast completion of a fairly menial task (pretty much all of the PSI subtests), and practicing recalling digit sequences (WMI) would be relatively easy and could lead to increased results. A quick google search showed me what is included in the Coding and Digit Span tests. It would be trivial to make a game out of those and prep my kids, should I be so inclined. I have no idea how you would really prep the other sections.

Also, it's common for smart kids to have lower PSI. Part of that is that they're methodical and afraid of making mistakes. Part of that could be sacrificing speed for neatness.

People need to just stop with the "suspected prepping" nonsense.