Gifted Public Of course, anyone?? How can he score 92 when he got them all correct?

Bracken School Readiness Assessment� (BSRA) Scores
Number of
Items
Items Correct Percentile Rank
Total BSRA Score 88 88 92

BSRA Subtest Scores Number of Items Items Correct

Colors Subtest 11 11
Letters Subtest 16 16
Numbers/Counting Subtest 19 19
Sizes Subtest 12 12
Comparisons Subtest 10 10
Shapes Subtest 20 20

8% of those taking the test also got them all right, so the score isn't that rare, even if it is perfect.

I was pretty ticked off that my 800 GRE score was 95th percentile, but I guess that section wasn't too hard for anyone.

Sounds like a test that doesn't distinguish in the tails because it's too easy for many kids. There are *many* tests kids take with similar issues including ACT/SAT for many kids.

Really? That is what it means? So the highest score possible for that part is 92%.

WOW crazy, that is just not right. They should make the tests harder.

Thanks for the answer. I was sure it had to be a mistake.

Hi Tracey
Guess you're enjoying nyc's annual farce! And you are not the only one annoyed, i heard the same thing from other parents too! Kaikab's answer is illustrated comparing my DS and yours, because they are absurdly taking the same test, so where it is rare for 5 year olds to get 83 out of 88 my DS gets a 99 but more older kids get them all right because it's colors and shapes and stuff kids in school should know! Actually the fact that it is a 92 is rather disheartening that it's not lower. Are you trying for a citywide slot?

DeHe

I just wrote Tracey back that DD got them all right and got a 98, wo she averaged 99, with the 25% weighting on the 98.

Since her birthday is end of Sept, the bell curve put her in range that her overall was 99. So kids with a birthday early in the year don't have a chance.

Hi DeHe,
But it says the percentile rank in comparison to students of the same age??

I always learned that 92 Percentile means 8 percent scored higher which is not possible

I am just sooo confused. I guess it just confirms my feelings on how dumb the city schools are lol

Tracey
I think what it means in total is that the olsat counts more for the older kids in that you have to do better on olsat to do better overall. Ren's point about age matters depending on what age dc is - apparently they don't age norm after 2nd. But still, no one did better than he did on the BRSA!

Just read on inside schools that 14000 took the test, 4000 made the 90% and 1400 made the 97%. Yeah for NYC 1400 meet their criteria for citywide g&t, oops we only have 300 seats!!

Grrr!!

DeHe

I didn't realize that the Stanford tests were figuring the percentiles that way. I had a homeschooled 5th grader whom I tested on the SAT last year who missed 25-35% of the questions on some of the sections and still came out in the low 90s in terms of percentiles on some of those (science comes to mind as one subtest where that was the case.)

Hi Dehe,
Wow that is something, only 300 seats crazy!
I have been joking my DS will be placed in the same shitty school he was last time he tested and seems that will be the case. We got 2 choices, one of them is better and packed the other one is bad and that is what he will get for a 2nd time lol.

Hi Dottie,

I never knew they could score tests like taht, just seems so unfair. So is life I guess.
Thanks to all for all the answers. You guys are smarter than anyone I know. I knew I could get some answers on here : )
I knew I would never get any answers from teh city.

Wouldn't it be great if my DS scored everything perfect and still did not make citywide. Now that would be some news story.
He got 7 wrong on the entire test. I wonder if he did get them all right what would the score be.

WOW those scores look so unfair. Just 2 wrong and you end up in the 56th percentile. Shouldn't these tests be harder?

I understand your frustration, but actually the percentiles are not unfair.

Think of it this way: if 10% of the kids get a perfect score on a test, is it accurate for all of these kids to think that they are in the 99th percentile? Of course not. They're all in the top 10%, and since it's impossible from that test to tell where they fall, then all that you can say is that they are at the 90th percentile or above. That may sound unreasonably low, but remember that NONE of the other kids of the same age has a higher percentile. I'm sure that the schools understand this (and they probably even get the raw scores and know when a kid got a perfect score). In those cases, if they need to distinguish between all of the kids with scores in the 90th percentile, then they would look at other factors.

It seems to me that what is unfair is giving too much weight to a test that is clearly too easy for the student population being tested.

I hope it all works out for you and your DS.

I read elsewhere that it was a contractual thing - they made a deal for the test for LDs and then did something else but was stuck with the contract through this year and so had to use it for something so why not gifted! Not sure if that's just rumor or not. But the other rumor supports it - apparently next year will be a different test - upgraded OLSAT or just a new vendor entirely

The whole thing has made me quite a conspiracy theorist - I am convinced that they are actually ranking within this so called lottery system because the lottery isn't public. I am not sure if my DS or tracey's would benefit from that, but it has to be better than the lunacy of qualifying but not getting a seat!

DeHe

Just confirms my feeling that anything run by the city is just a disaster.

All those parents with kids who do qualify for the citywide and do not get a seat must really be upset.

Yep but the city will never spend the money on screeing and then testing again. Didn't they used to use the standford binet though?

Anderson used the SB when they controlled their admissions. So when you took the test for Hunter, you could submit it for Anderson. But there was too much room for parents to manipulate and didn't open up the process for kids who couldn't afford the SB or parents who were not connected.

A threatening law suit from the AG in NY told them to change the system. Hence the DOE moved to the OLSAT which was cheap to administer to the whole city.

But they should have made it harder so the curve didn't top out the way it does for kids entering 2nd grade. It is ridiculous for DD to get 98th for perfect score and your son to get 92nd for perfect score. On the OLSAT portion, DD got one wrong and a 99th percentile, with her Sept birthday. I do not know how many she could get wrong. I was sure she totally screwed up because it took her 25 minutes and it was supposed to take over an hour. When she walked in after the test, my heart sank, I was totally sure she couldn't have done well in 25 minutes.

She showed me. But what a stupid test. And even now, I have to see if there are any spots for 2nd grade and if she gets lucky in the lottery for any spots.

Ren

Hi Ren,

Your DD did great even though she did it so fast. My DS was not fast and he missed more on the OLSAT. He got 53 out of 60. Just OLSAT score is 96percentile so still not enough for citywide but at least if he did scored better on the BSRA maybe he could have gotten bumped up a point and not down lol.
So now how did you rank the citywide schools. Would you consider any besides Anderson? That is the only one I would have considered and I knew it really was impossible. We got 2 school choices and I am sure we will get the same crappy school he got last time lol

Okay, I've been reading these posts and now I'm wondering about my 6 year old daughter's chances of getting into NEST + m for the 1st grade; which is my wife and I's first choice (Anderson is second). My daughter got a perfect score on the OLSAT and Bracken sections, and of course scored in the 99th percentile because of that. My little honey's a very smart girl, but I fell off my sofa when I opened the pdf file with her results (holy christmas, she got them all right...it was 4:45 am on April 26th, and I cheered loudly in my apartment, and then controlled myself when I realized everyone else in my neighborhood was still sleeping...I drove to do the laundry, after taping a copy of ny daughter's score to my bedroom door, and called my wife at 7:30, and said, "Honey, go look at the door..." My wife screamed and we celebrated all day long...). So now, after all this excitement, and all this wonderful news, and dreams about my daughter's future presidential run at the age of 35, well, now I'm wondering. Does anyone have a good idea about the selection process beyond scores? I know that having a sibling in a school of choice gives you precedence over other kids (my youngest son just turned four, and he's on par with his big sister smartswise, though at some things, like vocabulary, and logic, he's measurable better), and if my daughter gets in, she'll drag her little brother right along with her if he scores in the 97th percentile; but what are my daughter's chances at our first choice school? Is the selection into first grade for Citywide based first on scores? Or is there someo other conspiratorial criteria? Any enlightenment would be helpful...thanks.

Great post , loved reading it lol. CONGRATS!!!!
I wish I had some answers for you.
I guess it depends on how many seats are available. Since 1st is not the entry grade right? I believe all the entry grades have been kindergarten for a while or am I wrong?
If 1st is the entry grade then she has a way better chance. Now for Anderson they have to take a special test and then get ranked, that is what I heard but for the other citywides I dk if they have another test.

And don't worry these schools are not the end all and be all we don't even know if they will be any good.
I took my ds out of a gifted class because it was more remedial lol

Exegesis
Congrats, your sharp cookie did awesome! Unfortunately, Tracey is right - the entry point for Nest, Anderson and the rest is K, so she is competing for the few spots that open up because people move and even more unfortunately, siblings apparently get first dibs on those seats. Even worse, if you look at the school's websites they indicate that they are not anticipating having any K seats. Would you consider STEM or BSI or TAG - you might have a better shot.

Is she in g&T now? If not use can use it for that too. I would like to believe that there is a ranking of scores rather than the lottery - meaning that getting them all right ranks you higher than someone who didn't. But all the publicly discussed info indicates that all 99s are created equal and chosen randomly. However, its not public knowledge so who knows what they do.

I would definitely use the info to see what other options she has where she is if not already in gifted.

DeHe

Thanks for the kind words and suggestions. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for NEST, and TAG is too far (live in Brooklyn), BSI, well, I'm not impressed by the school, it's too new, and I just may put my daughter in a private school (which at present would be a really big sacrifice), and see where that takes me...thanks again.

Even though Nest has more classes per grade, they did not have any grade 1 spots at this time last year (too many sibs) Anderson had 2 spots. I love NEST as a school but it is far from up here. I have DD in the science program at the Museum of Natural History and she could never make it up here from NEST.

So I only put Anderson, since she is the top District G&T now. Which means if I don't get a spot, I can keep trying until Oct.

Ren

Well, I empathize with all of you trying to get in to limited spots at fantastic public schools. That said, here in Orlando, we do not have any such options at all, so our chances of getting in are zero. :-) I would love it if we had a district wide gifted school, but that doesn't seem like it will ever be an option. We are limited to so-so public schools, or private education. There are not even any private schools that are exclusively for the gifted here in this area.

Ren
Sent you a PM

DeHe

Jeebus...Wren, you just stopped my heart. I thought that my daughter's perfect score on the G&T test would move her to the top of the line, and get her a spot. But now, well, I can't believe it. Wow, what a lot of disappointment; it's crazy that I can be so high when I got her results and now... I don't know much about the selection process, so I'm wondering, Wren, you get to keep trying to get your child into G&T if you only select one school on the application? I chose two. Now I'm thinking I should resubmit and choose every school offered to my daughter.

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