Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment All Correct On BSRA yet gets a score of 92 how???

Exergesis68 you have to rank them all don't leave anything blank!
Call them and resubmit and rank all the school choices so she gets into 1 of them at least. If you don't choose them all you are not guaranteed

thanks, I resubmitted online but didn't pick all the programs she can apply for, but did rank most of them (all the Citywides, plus a few district programs near me, except for the present school she's in, which is a terrible place). Thanks for the advice, Tracey...it's truly appreciated. Now I'm hunting down ways to force the issue, and learn how to use a little bit of political clout I didn't realize I had...wish me luck.

Good Luck Exegesis68. I know how it feels when your child is in a bad school and you feel helpless.
Keep me posted!! With her scores she should get into one of the schools you choose.

Tracey

Did you get this email, apparently you aren't the only one who complained! The link is from a post on inside schools
See antonin2071
Inside schools

DeHe

http://insideschools.org/blog/2011/06/08/gt-letters-to-go-out-by-june-17/

Here is some more percentile weirdness from Stanford Achievement:

My son appeared to score in the 98th percentile in total reading (89/90 raw score), 99th percentile in total math (49/50 raw score), aced the rest of the test (100% right), but his total battery percentile is only 93rd....all I can tell from this is he is somewhere between 93rd and 99th (I think)...I have had a few stats classes in college/post grad...this doesn't make sense....the math, reading and total percentiles shown below cannot be correct simultaneously.

In detail, here are my son's 1st Grade Stanford 10 Achievement Test Scores:

Total Reading: 89/90, Nat'l PR-S = 98-9, Nat'l NCE = 93.3
Total Math: 49/50, Nat'l PR-S = 99-9, Nat'l NCE = 99.0
Language: 30/30, Nat'l PR-S = 98-9, Nat'l NCE = 93.2
Spelling: 30/30, Nat'l PR-S = 89-8, Nat'l NCE = 75.8
Environment: 30/30, Nat'l PR-S = 99-9, Nat'l NCE = 99.0
Total Battery: 228/230, Nat'l PR-S = 93-8, Nat'l NCE = 80.9

PR-S = percentile rank-stanine
NCE = normal curve equivalent

Let's equate a correct answer as a step forward, and 100 students take such steps...at the end of the reading section, my son has taken 89 steps forward, and per Stanford (98th percentile in reading), ~2 other students are at or above 89 steps, the rest have less than 89 steps forward....after math, he has now taken 138 steps forward (89+49), and per Stanford (99th percentile in math), only one other student could be at that number of total steps (138), as only one other student took 49 steps forward in math....now even if all 100 students take 30 steps forward for the remaining 3 tests (90 steps total), only one other student would appear to be at 228/230 steps at the end of the total battery per the component percentiles, yet Stanford is saying 7 other students are (93rd percentile)....something doesn't appear right with the data they are presenting.

You reasoning is somewhat flawed. 2% of the children who took the test missed one question or fewer in reading. What if most of them actually got perfect scores in this subsection (90 steps, in your analogy)? Then they would have two questions to miss in math or some section where your child scored perfectly (they would only need 48 steps to get to 138), and although they would be "behind" in those areas, they would still be "even" in the total battery. Likewise, if the one percent who did as well or better in math got perfect scores, they would have two points to miss in reading or some other subsection to stay "even" for the total. Right there we have the possibility of three percent, not one percent, of the other children having the same total battery. I don't know how they deal with rounding when reporting their percentile ranks, but that could easily account for another percentile or two. I'm having a bit of an issue trying to stretch it all the way to seven...but there is certainly no reason to think that the total battery should be 99th percentile.

I see your point about an extra percent or two�it is theoretically possible, given a standard rounding assumption, that 15/1000 outscored (versus just tied) my son on math, and 25/1000 outscored (versus just tied) my son on reading...and it is possible that all of the 25 who possibly outscored by son on reading were one lower on the math section (thus met or exceeded my son's total score); and all of the 15 that possibly outscored my son on math were one lower on the reading section (thus met or exceeded my son's total score); no overlap between the perfect or one point from perfect scores in the two sections; thus yielding 40 total students (4%) at or above my son's score. Everyone else who was one point lower than my son in either the math or reading section could not catch up to meet his total score, as the 25/1000 and 15/1000 who met or exceeded (in this extreme example exceeded) my son�s scores in the other sections are already accounted for in the 4% figure�.so absolute worst case you could come up with 96.0% total percentile, I think��

However...it is also theoretically possible that only 5 (or 0)/1000 were at or ahead of him in math, and 15 at or ahead of him in reading, with zero overlap/zero ties/zero one point lower in the other section, yielding 0% at or above his overall score (100.0 percentile). The median between these two extreme endpoints would be 98.0%.

93% is just too low, if the samples taking each piece of the battery are reasonably similar in quality (quantity could float and there should be no impact), or there is something off about the 99% math and 98% reading percentiles.

I read elsewhere that the 100 percentile is not given by Stanford Achievement. If this is true, 99% could be 98.5% � 100% (let�s say 99.0% to be conservative), and 98% could be 97.5% - 98.5% (let�s say 97.75% to be conservative). A reasonable person would estimate 1.0% math + 2.25% reading = 3.25% worst case, with some shrinkage due to overlap, and you are in the 97.5 to 98.5 range again (98%).

Of course all of this is academic as the �headroom� on this exam is clearly lacking in the high 90 percentiles (as a previous poster pointed out)�especially given that this test was being taken by 7 year olds who could easily get distracted/bored.

I will look into other IQ/achievement tests he could possibly take. Suggestions are welcome.

Just saw this yesterday, so I am responding to the question to me.

Since DD is in a district G&T, the best in district 3, I only put the citywide, Anderson. I love Nest but it is located on the lower east side and DD's science class at the museum would be impossible to get to and her other extracurriculars are on the UWS. Since I only put Anderson, I am currently fighting for a 2nd grade spot. I keep pestering and had worked with the district advocate during the year, pleading my case. She had a great teacher and grade 1 worked, with CTY, and since her birthday is end of Sept, she is one of the youngest in the class but also the smallest so I am OK with last year but it really depends on the teacher you get.

Once you are in a district gifted, you only get citywide choices.

Ren

Gusto,

Happened to encounter a college stats teacher and put this to them, they are also unable to reconcile your DSs individual test percentiles with the total battery percentile.

Polly