< Return to Talk
06.27.08, 12:45 PM NY Schools
23 replies
And once again, I propose that next year the DOE places all the 97%+ in a hat and pick for citywides from that pile. Arguing between a 98% and a 99% is like splitting hairs. [ Reply | Watch | Flag ]
NY Schools 06.27.08, 12:45 PM Flag
 

Dear UrbanBaby community,

Thank you so much for being a valued member of the UrbanBaby community. We wanted to inform you that we are shutting down the site on July 6th. We are grateful for your participation and support that has helped make UrbanBaby such an important resource to parents for many years.

If you have any questions or concerns, you can email us at urbanbaby-support@cbsinteractive.com.

Thanks so much,

UrbanBaby Support

»
Why? Seems silly to make 97 an arbitrary cutoff, then. What about the 96s? I think it makes sense to go down percentiles. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 12:51 PM Flag
»
Well, you have to cut it off somewhere. Since the DOE had set the cutoff at 97% for citywides, let's start there. The 90%-95% can go into a hat for districtwides. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 01:01 PM Flag
»
90-96 and all the kids that lucked out in the 97+ range [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 02:49 PM Flag
»
it's all stupid. any kid who scores above 95 could probably score between 85 and 99 on any other day. I propose that the DOE immediately work on opening a citywide school in Brooklyn, and maybe on in Queens as well. Oh yeah, and how about sharing the actual G&T curriculum with the parents? [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 12:54 PM Flag
»
np: My child was getting SB as part of a SN testing workup (he has speech/OT delays). He tested a 38 (yes, 38) the first time on one of them. Testers thought he was just having a bad day, retested again a few days later - 98. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 12:57 PM Flag
»
I think they should put all the 90+ , at least until they get a better test, but that is just me. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 12:55 PM Flag
»
Does anyone know what the publisher of the OLSAT says about that level of specificity in their test? I know that the Wikipedia entry says that it is less discreet at the higher range but there is no citation for that so I trust it only a little more than UB... [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 01:09 PM Flag
»
why does it matter? The test is the test. It comes back with a number that more or less has something to do with school readiness and giftedness. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 02:50 PM Flag
»
What the publisher says? The person who gets paid for it? The standard error of estimate for the OLSAT is 7.48 points. However, why it is not normally used for 4-year-olds is more complicated and I'm having a hard time finding a site that isn't closed to the general public (mom has access). If you want to research, check the following articles: Multivariate Validity of the Otis-Lennon Mental Ability Tests Primary I Level, "Investigations of the Otis-Lennon School Ability Test to Predict WISC-R Full Scale IQ for Referred Children", Otis-Lennon School Ability Test: Australian Criterion Validity . Sorry but real research is rarely google-able and NEVER comes from the company selling the product. Nobody's saying that the OLSAT doesn't have its uses, but it was never intended to be a stand-alone test. It is supposed to be a supplemental assessment, not a primary. The Stanford Binet has that advantage of being not entirely multiple-choice, and is generally the test of choice. http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/current_use.htm [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 03:05 PM Flag
»
if you happen to be watching, thanks. I'm off to read. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.30.08, 07:25 AM Flag
»
Agree that the olsat does not distinguish at the higher levels. there are 99s and there are 99s. I have a very gifted 99, but know others from our class who were obviously prepped to get the score, and are not at all advanced. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 02:47 PM Flag
»
OLSAT has the lowest ceiling of any of the tests. Meaning, 99 on the OLSAT could be a 99, 98, or even 95 on another test that has a higher level of criteria. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 03:06 PM Flag
»
I hope you realize how ridiculous you sound. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 03:45 PM Flag
»
Doesn't sound ridiculous at all. That comment is based on sound psychological and educational research, published in major journals. There are true issues with the ceiling on the olsat. It was actually nice to see an informed post for once, rather than a generalizing one like yours. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.28.08, 05:50 AM Flag
»
The OLSAT has over a 7 point error margin. So arguing between a 93% and 99% is like splitting hairs. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 02:47 PM Flag
»
The cut-off has to be done somewhere. Nobody is arguing where the cut-off should be. We are argiung that once the cut-off is made every eligible child has the same chance to get into a citywide program. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 02:49 PM Flag
»
Right, but I think her point is all these people who fear their dc will be dragged down in a district G&T by all those low 90s are being absurd. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.28.08, 05:54 AM Flag
»
It doesn't matter because next year, unless they modify the OLSAT and make it significantly harder than it was this year, more people will prep their kids for this test, and rather than having 447 99s, it'll be 800 99s. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 03:49 PM Flag
»
ita. there's no difference. they're all gifted. let them all have the same shot. the test is so flawed that there's absolutely no evidence 99s are any more gifted than 98s or 97s. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 03:51 PM Flag
»
I think the way they did it this year is fine. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.27.08, 03:55 PM Flag
»
Because it worked for you. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.28.08, 05:51 AM Flag
»
It actually worked just fin for the majority of people. It's just a handful of noisy folks. Read the comments on insideschools.org. It's a handful of DOE haters posting there regularly. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.30.08, 07:57 AM Flag
»
np. you really have no idea who it "worked" for and who it didn't. not all those people are posting on insideschools. the fact is, there's really no difference between a 99 and a 97 given how flawed the testing is. since they are all highly gifted by the doe's definition, the hat thing makes most sense imo. [ Reply | More
]
General Topics 06.30.08, 08:23 AM Flag
Refresh » New Post »
Select Category
close [X]

close [X]

Select a Category (only 1)

category
Stages
Regions