Middle School Magnet Programs (criteria based)

[Anonymous]

I know the process has changed a lot through the years, but it sounds like for this year's (2022 - 2023) fifth graders, there's no application or anything parents do related to the Middle School Magnet Programs that are criteria based, i.e., Eastern, TP, Clemente, MLK.

Is that right? Am I missing something? DD is in fifth and I'm trying to get the lay of the land. TIA!

[Anonymous]

OP again - meant to include this link, which describes the process and timeline: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/specialprograms/middle/

[Anonymous]

All students will be screened and if your child qualifies, they will get a lottery slot. If your child wins the lottery, you will receive an invitation that you need to accept or decline.

[Anonymous]

No application. Universal review of criteria by MCPS central staff for inclusion in the lotteries. The criteria are adjusted to allow for similar levels of inclusion across a schools' FARMS status -- the MAP scores/national percentiles necessary for inclusion are lower for those whose elementary schools (unclear whether home area or attended, in the case of those at a language immersion or CES program) have higher FARMS rates on a sliding scale across five FARMS rate groupings. This is what is meant when MCPS refers to "local norming," and, at the extremes, it can mean the difference between 60th percentile (national) and 93rd being the cutoff when applied to the 21-22 school year, with only 8 elementaries falling in the high-FARMS (60th-percentile cutoff) tranche. The 85th percentile was the target for the moderate-FARMS middle tranche.

It is unclear if the 85th-percentile middle-tranche/overall target will be adjusted, and individual schools may change FARMS status (high, moderate high, moderate, low moderate, low) from last year to this, impacting the local norming of the national percentiles for these schools. The tests that are evaluated are the ones going on right now (now past for some schools) -- fall of the 5th grade year, MAP-R (for Eastern/MLK), MAP-M (for TP/Clemente). In addition, students would need to achieve an A in the relevant subject areas (Reading & Writing for Eastern/MLK; Math for TP/Clemente, with no adjustment for being in Math 5-6), with my understanding being that it is now only this period's grade that is included (as opposed to including 4th-grade grades, as in the past). A further criteria was having an above-grade reading level; I am uncertain if this criteria has survived for both the humanities-focused and math/science-focused programs.

There does not seem to be a current heuristic that would allow for a "bad day" score or other extenuating circumstance. It also is unclear if there would be communications to parents of the final criteria and a student's status vs. those criteria that would offer an opportunity to appeal prior to the lottery being conducted. Lottery results are expected to be communicated in January. Experience from last year was that such appeals were only possible after the lottery was conducted, placing successful appellants in the wait pool, with even less chance of being offered a seat, as that would require both spots being declined by students who had been offered a seat and then favorable lottery results from within the wait pool.

There are 125 6th-grade seats in the TPMS program, 25 of which are reserved for those within the TPMS catchment and the remaining 100 of which draw from the lower portion of the County. I'm uncertain about the numbers reserved for the in-catchment population at the other three schools, but there are 112 seats at Eastern, serving the same area of the County, and 75 at both Clemente & MLK, which serve the upper portion of the County. The difference in seats roughly mirrors the difference in student populations (up-County vs. down-County).

Those selected for the lottery but not placed in one of those programs are supposed to be offered the enriched/accelerated AIM (math) and/or HIGH (social studies) courses at their local MS.

Hope this helps. Take it with a grain of salt; if MCPS communicates updated detail that is contradictory, I'd rely on that, instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No application. Universal review of criteria by MCPS central staff for inclusion in the lotteries. The criteria are adjusted to allow for similar levels of inclusion across a schools' FARMS status -- the MAP scores/national percentiles necessary for inclusion are lower for those whose elementary schools (unclear whether home area or attended, in the case of those at a language immersion or CES program) have higher FARMS rates on a sliding scale across five FARMS rate groupings. This is what is meant when MCPS refers to "local norming," and, at the extremes, it can mean the difference between 60th percentile (national) and 93rd being the cutoff when applied to the 21-22 school year, with only 8 elementaries falling in the high-FARMS (60th-percentile cutoff) tranche. The 85th percentile was the target for the moderate-FARMS middle tranche.

It is unclear if the 85th-percentile middle-tranche/overall target will be adjusted, and individual schools may change FARMS status (high, moderate high, moderate, low moderate, low) from last year to this, impacting the local norming of the national percentiles for these schools. The tests that are evaluated are the ones going on right now (now past for some schools) -- fall of the 5th grade year, MAP-R (for Eastern/MLK), MAP-M (for TP/Clemente). In addition, students would need to achieve an A in the relevant subject areas (Reading & Writing for Eastern/MLK; Math for TP/Clemente, with no adjustment for being in Math 5-6), with my understanding being that it is now only this period's grade that is included (as opposed to including 4th-grade grades, as in the past). A further criteria was having an above-grade reading level; I am uncertain if this criteria has survived for both the humanities-focused and math/science-focused programs.

There does not seem to be a current heuristic that would allow for a "bad day" score or other extenuating circumstance. It also is unclear if there would be communications to parents of the final criteria and a student's status vs. those criteria that would offer an opportunity to appeal prior to the lottery being conducted. Lottery results are expected to be communicated in January. Experience from last year was that such appeals were only possible after the lottery was conducted, placing successful appellants in the wait pool, with even less chance of being offered a seat, as that would require both spots being declined by students who had been offered a seat and then favorable lottery results from within the wait pool.

There are 125 6th-grade seats in the TPMS program, 25 of which are reserved for those within the TPMS catchment and the remaining 100 of which draw from the lower portion of the County. I'm uncertain about the numbers reserved for the in-catchment population at the other three schools, but there are 112 seats at Eastern, serving the same area of the County, and 75 at both Clemente & MLK, which serve the upper portion of the County. The difference in seats roughly mirrors the difference in student populations (up-County vs. down-County).

Those selected for the lottery but not placed in one of those programs are supposed to be offered the enriched/accelerated AIM (math) and/or HIGH (social studies) courses at their local MS.

Hope this helps. Take it with a grain of salt; if MCPS communicates updated detail that is contradictory, I'd rely on that, instead.

This is a very good summary. Just wanted to add, which PP touched on a bit: this criteria was from last year (and differed for the year before that). MCPS has a really unfortunate habit of backing into the process and communicating criteria after the fact. Meaning, they take the grades, scores, multiple measures they have, determine which or how many students they want in the lottery, then use that to determine the cut offs/local norming algorithms, etc. It’s a lot of manipulating the data to get a desired outcome rather than the transparent process they make it out to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a very good summary. Just wanted to add, which PP touched on a bit: this criteria was from last year (and differed for the year before that). MCPS has a really unfortunate habit of backing into the process and communicating criteria after the fact. Meaning, they take the grades, scores, multiple measures they have, determine which or how many students they want in the lottery, then use that to determine the cut offs/local norming algorithms, etc. It’s a lot of manipulating the data to get a desired outcome rather than the transparent process they make it out to be.

Definitely could have changes this year. Doubtful that that would stray from the paradigm. More likely to be the target %ile and/or which period's grades are in play, though those could have significant effect.

Backing in is similar to many things MCPS. Reactive rather than proactive. Could be the resource constraints. Could be the managerial effectiveness. Could be the underlying leadership goals.

The mechanics could be manipulation. Hard to prove. Could also be less manipulative in the pejorative sense, depending on one's feelings about the system's goals. Definitely not transparent enough or communicated well enough in a timely manner to allow families to make reasonable plans (e.g., ensuring good sleep prior to MAP administration, having student focus within relevant grading period/speaking with teacher if there is an anomaly, launching a timely appeal; this is not suggesting test prep or the like) or for the community to have timely input as to whether the paradigm needs adjustment.