Waitpool: Engineering Program at Wheaton

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s all demographics based, not performance based. That’s why there is no transparency. Good luck to your child on whatever program they attend.

Ignore this person who posts that Wheaton isn't merit-based on any question anyone has about Wheaton. They're misinformed. Test scores, grades, etc. are the main criteria for these programs. It's just bizarre to say otherwise. I'ts just some anti-Wheaton person who doesn't like that race and gender might be considered in any admissions process (I have no idea what the reality is on that for Wheaton, and don't care enough to find out - fine with me if race and gender are considered).

Anyway, historically there is some decent movement on the wait pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s all demographics based, not performance based. That’s why there is no transparency. Good luck to your child on whatever program they attend.

Ignore this person who posts that Wheaton isn't merit-based on any question anyone has about Wheaton. They're misinformed. Test scores, grades, etc. are the main criteria for these programs. It's just bizarre to say otherwise. I'ts just some anti-Wheaton person who doesn't like that race and gender might be considered in any admissions process (I have no idea what the reality is on that for Wheaton, and don't care enough to find out - fine with me if race and gender are considered).

Anyway, historically there is some decent movement on the wait pool.

Wait, so you have no idea what the reality is, don’t care enough to find out, but care enough to say that this person should be ignored and is misinformed?

What you clearly meant to say was don’t listen to that poster’s critical comments, because you disagree with them.

[Anonymous]

It does move. Know of several kids who got off last year. One also got of RMIB wait list and went there instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s all demographics based, not performance based. That’s why there is no transparency. Good luck to your child on whatever program they attend.

In other words, you kid didn't make it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s all demographics based, not performance based. That’s why there is no transparency. Good luck to your child on whatever program they attend.

In other words, you kid didn't make it.

The child probably wasn’t diverse enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s all demographics based, not performance based. That’s why there is no transparency. Good luck to your child on whatever program they attend.

Ignore this person who posts that Wheaton isn't merit-based on any question anyone has about Wheaton. They're misinformed. Test scores, grades, etc. are the main criteria for these programs. It's just bizarre to say otherwise. I'ts just some anti-Wheaton person who doesn't like that race and gender might be considered in any admissions process (I have no idea what the reality is on that for Wheaton, and don't care enough to find out - fine with me if race and gender are considered).

Anyway, historically there is some decent movement on the wait pool.

Wait, so you have no idea what the reality is, don’t care enough to find out, but care enough to say that this person should be ignored and is misinformed?

What you clearly meant to say was don’t listen to that poster’s critical comments, because you disagree with them.

No. The person said it is ALL demographics based. That is misinformed. That is demonstrably wrong.

[Anonymous]

If there was a diversity element to the application, that would be one thing. It’s advertised as a merit based program, but it is diversity based.

Are we really excited about programs where children are denied opportunities because of their diversity or lack thereof?

And if that’s not the case, why the anger and finger pointing at the allegation? Why not just prove, with transparency, that the allegation is wrong?

Because in this district, a child’s demographic data point is more important than a child’s academic data point.

And the beat goes on…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s all demographics based, not performance based. That’s why there is no transparency. Good luck to your child on whatever program they attend.

In other words, you kid didn't make it.

The child probably wasn’t diverse enough.

With a little grit, hard work, and growth mindset, maybe your child will one day become diverse enough to qualify.

[Anonymous]

My kid was waitlisted to the Wheaton engineering magnet and did not get off the waitlist. They decided to do the PLTW academy instead and it has been a good experience, though they sometimes say they wish they were in the magnet for social reasons. But they managed to take a lot of the same classes the magnet kids take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If there was a diversity element to the application, that would be one thing. It’s advertised as a merit based program, but it is diversity based.

Are we really excited about programs where children are denied opportunities because of their diversity or lack thereof?

And if that’s not the case, why the anger and finger pointing at the allegation? Why not just prove, with transparency, that the allegation is wrong?

Because in this district, a child’s demographic data point is more important than a child’s academic data point.

And the beat goes on…

I guess my white boy’s acceptance was just an anomaly?

Seriously though, the HS applications are race and school blind. This is a fact and PP has an axe to grind for some reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there was a diversity element to the application, that would be one thing. It’s advertised as a merit based program, but it is diversity based.

Are we really excited about programs where children are denied opportunities because of their diversity or lack thereof?

And if that’s not the case, why the anger and finger pointing at the allegation? Why not just prove, with transparency, that the allegation is wrong?

Because in this district, a child’s demographic data point is more important than a child’s academic data point.

And the beat goes on…

I guess my white boy’s acceptance was just an anomaly?

Seriously though, the HS applications are race and school blind. This is a fact and PP has an axe to grind for some reason.

This is adorable. Your "white boy" got in so therefor the unfair, non-transparent, secret system must work and we all must accept it. Luckily your "white boy" child was diverse enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there was a diversity element to the application, that would be one thing. It’s advertised as a merit based program, but it is diversity based.

Are we really excited about programs where children are denied opportunities because of their diversity or lack thereof?

And if that’s not the case, why the anger and finger pointing at the allegation? Why not just prove, with transparency, that the allegation is wrong?

Because in this district, a child’s demographic data point is more important than a child’s academic data point.

And the beat goes on…

I guess my white boy’s acceptance was just an anomaly?

Seriously though, the HS applications are race and school blind. This is a fact and PP has an axe to grind for some reason.

This is adorable. Your "white boy" got in so therefor the unfair, non-transparent, secret system must work and we all must accept it. Luckily your "white boy" child was diverse enough.

The discussion is about the engineering magnet at Wheaton. There is no unfair secret system in accepting who gets in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there was a diversity element to the application, that would be one thing. It’s advertised as a merit based program, but it is diversity based.

Are we really excited about programs where children are denied opportunities because of their diversity or lack thereof?

And if that’s not the case, why the anger and finger pointing at the allegation? Why not just prove, with transparency, that the allegation is wrong?

Because in this district, a child’s demographic data point is more important than a child’s academic data point.

And the beat goes on…

I guess my white boy’s acceptance was just an anomaly?

Seriously though, the HS applications are race and school blind. This is a fact and PP has an axe to grind for some reason.

This is adorable. Your "white boy" got in so therefor the unfair, non-transparent, secret system must work and we all must accept it. Luckily your "white boy" child was diverse enough.

The discussion is about the engineering magnet at Wheaton. There is no unfair secret system in accepting who gets in.

Then why is it so secret???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If there was a diversity element to the application, that would be one thing. It’s advertised as a merit based program, but it is diversity based.

Are we really excited about programs where children are denied opportunities because of their diversity or lack thereof?

And if that’s not the case, why the anger and finger pointing at the allegation? Why not just prove, with transparency, that the allegation is wrong?

Because in this district, a child’s demographic data point is more important than a child’s academic data point.

And the beat goes on…

I guess my white boy’s acceptance was just an anomaly?

Seriously though, the HS applications are race and school blind. This is a fact and PP has an axe to grind for some reason.

This is adorable. Your "white boy" got in so therefor the unfair, non-transparent, secret system must work and we all must accept it. Luckily your "white boy" child was diverse enough.

The discussion is about the engineering magnet at Wheaton. There is no unfair secret system in accepting who gets in.

Then why is it so secret???

It’s not. What are you even talking about?