I don't get it- very few CES kids get into magnet school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If something like 6700 were tested and the number of kids invited to 4 magnet programs is -- maybe -- 600 total, that's less than 1% acceptance rate?
Even friggin' Ivies are easier to get into! WTF?

It's 300. 50 to MLK, 50 to Clemente, 100 to TPMS and 100 to Eastern. Down from 675 seats for CES.

And, for what it's worth, your math is a little off. That would be roughly 9%.

But it wasn’t only CES kids that tested, so a smaller percentage of tested/accepted.

PP said that 6700 tested with 600 seats was less than 1%. That would be 9%.

It's actually 300 seats which would make the acceptance rate closer to 5%. Still a bit larger than the <1% from the PP even with the mistakenly inflated numbers.

[Anonymous]

CES kids also are not an advantage for a STEM program since it's humanities focused. Sure, they may be bright kids, but no reason a non-CES kid couldn't do as well or better on math screeners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CES kids also are not an advantage for a STEM program since it's humanities focused. Sure, they may be bright kids, but no reason a non-CES kid couldn't do as well or better on math screeners.

I'd expect higher CES participation at the humanities magnet as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If something like 6700 were tested and the number of kids invited to 4 magnet programs is -- maybe -- 600 total, that's less than 1% acceptance rate?
Even friggin' Ivies are easier to get into! WTF?

Yep, hence the saying " it's easier to get into Harvard than Blair SMACS ".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's 300. 50 to MLK, 50 to Clemente, 100 to TPMS and 100 to Eastern. Down from 675 seats for CES.

PP said that 6700 tested with 600 seats was less than 1%. That would be 9%.

It's actually 300 seats which would make the acceptance rate closer to 5%. Still a bit larger than the <1% from the PP even with the mistakenly inflated numbers.

I thought the CES kids were supposed to be the top 3-4th percentile of MCPS. Does the 675 CES seats number include the local centers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's 300. 50 to MLK, 50 to Clemente, 100 to TPMS and 100 to Eastern. Down from 675 seats for CES.

PP said that 6700 tested with 600 seats was less than 1%. That would be 9%.

It's actually 300 seats which would make the acceptance rate closer to 5%. Still a bit larger than the <1% from the PP even with the mistakenly inflated numbers.

I thought the CES kids were supposed to be the top 3-4th percentile of MCPS. Does the 675 CES seats number include the local centers?

I believe that number includes local centers. There are around 13,000 fifth graders (6700 or roughly half took the CogAT), so 675 would be somewhere around the top 5%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except the goal of the whole reform was to increase URM representation in the magnet problem. The goal was set first. Then MCPS found a way. Not the other way around.

The goal wasn't just to increase URM representation, it was also to reduce Asian participation. MCPS has been pretty transparent about its concern that Asians are over represented in the magnets and over perform.

I've said this before and I'll say it again -- reducing Asian participation was not a GOAL, but it was a RESULT. There is a difference.[/quote

How do you know that wasn't the GOAL? It certainly was the RESULT....which leaves a very suspicious feeling about the "Goal"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's 300. 50 to MLK, 50 to Clemente, 100 to TPMS and 100 to Eastern. Down from 675 seats for CES.

PP said that 6700 tested with 600 seats was less than 1%. That would be 9%.

It's actually 300 seats which would make the acceptance rate closer to 5%. Still a bit larger than the <1% from the PP even with the mistakenly inflated numbers.

I thought the CES kids were supposed to be the top 3-4th percentile of MCPS. Does the 675 CES seats number include the local centers?

No. Only 800 or so, selected by their own parents, took the CES entrance test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's 300. 50 to MLK, 50 to Clemente, 100 to TPMS and 100 to Eastern. Down from 675 seats for CES.

PP said that 6700 tested with 600 seats was less than 1%. That would be 9%.

It's actually 300 seats which would make the acceptance rate closer to 5%. Still a bit larger than the <1% from the PP even with the mistakenly inflated numbers.

I thought the CES kids were supposed to be the top 3-4th percentile of MCPS. Does the 675 CES seats number include the local centers?

No. Only 800 or so, selected by their own parents, took the CES entrance test.

This is completely inaccurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's 300. 50 to MLK, 50 to Clemente, 100 to TPMS and 100 to Eastern. Down from 675 seats for CES.

PP said that 6700 tested with 600 seats was less than 1%. That would be 9%.

It's actually 300 seats which would make the acceptance rate closer to 5%. Still a bit larger than the <1% from the PP even with the mistakenly inflated numbers.

I thought the CES kids were supposed to be the top 3-4th percentile of MCPS. Does the 675 CES seats number include the local centers?

It is only the top 3-4 % of parents that are in the know or are okay with their kids traveling far distances away from their home school. People forget that many families don’t know enough or just don’t want to have their kids deal with all of the commuting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's 300. 50 to MLK, 50 to Clemente, 100 to TPMS and 100 to Eastern. Down from 675 seats for CES.

PP said that 6700 tested with 600 seats was less than 1%. That would be 9%.

It's actually 300 seats which would make the acceptance rate closer to 5%. Still a bit larger than the <1% from the PP even with the mistakenly inflated numbers.

I thought the CES kids were supposed to be the top 3-4th percentile of MCPS. Does the 675 CES seats number include the local centers?

No. Only 800 or so, selected by their own parents, took the CES entrance test.

This is completely inaccurate.

How? This year's MS magnet candidates are those who came into CES under the last year of the old system (ok except for the two schools that tested the new admissions system a year early).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's 300. 50 to MLK, 50 to Clemente, 100 to TPMS and 100 to Eastern. Down from 675 seats for CES.

PP said that 6700 tested with 600 seats was less than 1%. That would be 9%.

It's actually 300 seats which would make the acceptance rate closer to 5%. Still a bit larger than the <1% from the PP even with the mistakenly inflated numbers.

I thought the CES kids were supposed to be the top 3-4th percentile of MCPS. Does the 675 CES seats number include the local centers?

No. Only 800 or so, selected by their own parents, took the CES entrance test.

This is completely inaccurate.

How? This year's MS magnet candidates are those who came into CES under the last year of the old system (ok except for the two schools that tested the new admissions system a year early).

Top kids as selected by their parents...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's 300. 50 to MLK, 50 to Clemente, 100 to TPMS and 100 to Eastern. Down from 675 seats for CES.

PP said that 6700 tested with 600 seats was less than 1%. That would be 9%.

It's actually 300 seats which would make the acceptance rate closer to 5%. Still a bit larger than the <1% from the PP even with the mistakenly inflated numbers.

I thought the CES kids were supposed to be the top 3-4th percentile of MCPS. Does the 675 CES seats number include the local centers?

No. Only 800 or so, selected by their own parents, took the CES entrance test.

This is completely inaccurate.

How? This year's MS magnet candidates are those who came into CES under the last year of the old system (ok except for the two schools that tested the new admissions system a year early).

A LOT of non-CES kids tested for the MS magnet program.

[Anonymous]

People still don't get it?
It no longer has anything to do with who is smarter, CES or non-CES. It is all about the COHORT!!!

Talk to your local middle school principle and ask the school to provide HIGH-QUALITY, ENRICHED education to the cohort!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People still don't get it?
It no longer has anything to do with who is smarter, CES or non-CES. It is all about the COHORT!!!

Talk to your local middle school principle and ask the school to provide HIGH-QUALITY, ENRICHED education to the cohort!

This. They now put everyone who scores at an above average level into their “ qualified” pool and then use the peer cohort criteria to make the final decisions. It is no longer about which kids are the smartest per test scores or who have the greatest intellectual drive/thirst for knowledge per teacher recommendations and student essays
I just hope they don’t do this to the high school Magnet application process. There is less reason to worry about outliers in low performing high schools since every MCPS high school offers a robust selection of AP courses