MS magnet selection committee racial make up NOT REPRESENTATIVE

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's not the same at all and you're making that argument in bad faith.

Men dominate our society. There was no decrease or expected decrease in boys in the programs. In fact, MCPS had access to gender so they tried to balance the programs.

MCPS knew it was trying to decrease Asian representation in the magnets and they knew this was controversial.

If this is typical of the quality of argument the Office of Civil Rights received, I'm astonished that they're investigating.

They are investigating because there is reason to be suspicious. I don't know if they will find anything. I personally don't think MCPS was trying to protect white kids as some posters in the other thread suspect but that's just an opinion based on my gut. We don't have the facts.

[Anonymous]

MCPS knew it was trying to decrease Asian representation in the magnets and they knew this was controversial.

Sure but I think that MCPS is so insular that they honestly did not expect the outrage. They were more afraid of UMC white parents in the DCC who are in their business all the time. Many of the people in MCPS leadership now are part of the DCC crowd anyway. When Starr was superintendent, Bethesda always received favorable treatment. Despite his SFW tweets, he was very desperate to be accepted by the Whitman and other W crowd. Smith is a little out to lunch and not really connected to anyone or super engaged so its the next level down running the show. They are very ingrained with the DCC.

Regardless though, I agree that the selection committee isn't where the bias was applied. The central office gave the committee applications to consider. It had already removed most of the Asian American kids. This way MCPS could claim that the selection committee never saw race. This is also why kids with 99% COGAT and 99.9999% MAP were not even waitlisted. They never received consideration.

Someone needs to look at the data before the central office culled the list and see whether Asian American students really were required to score substantially higher to make into the consideration pool.

[Anonymous]

Talking about REPRESENTATIVE, why is the percentage of Asians in the Magnets over 50% when they are only 14%?
Now that's the outrage !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

MCPS knew it was trying to decrease Asian representation in the magnets and they knew this was controversial.

Sure but I think that MCPS is so insular that they honestly did not expect the outrage. They were more afraid of UMC white parents in the DCC who are in their business all the time. Many of the people in MCPS leadership now are part of the DCC crowd anyway. When Starr was superintendent, Bethesda always received favorable treatment. Despite his SFW tweets, he was very desperate to be accepted by the Whitman and other W crowd. Smith is a little out to lunch and not really connected to anyone or super engaged so its the next level down running the show. They are very ingrained with the DCC.

Regardless though, I agree that the selection committee isn't where the bias was applied. The central office gave the committee applications to consider. It had already removed most of the Asian American kids. This way MCPS could claim that the selection committee never saw race. This is also why kids with 99% COGAT and 99.9999% MAP were not even waitlisted. They never received consideration.

Someone needs to look at the data before the central office culled the list and see whether Asian American students really were required to score substantially higher to make into the consideration pool.

Well, that's an elaborate conspiracy theory.

Who or what is "the DCC crowd"? Is Bethesda in the DCC?

[Anonymous]

Again, the creators of tests say they can't meaningfully distinguish within the SEM, usually at least the top 2 percent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Talking about REPRESENTATIVE, why is the percentage of Asians in the Magnets over 50% when they are only 14%?
Now that's the outrage !

Sounds like the test has an unfair cultural bias.

[Anonymous]

Again, the creators of tests say they can't meaningfully distinguish within the SEM, usually at least the top 2 percent.

Well that's fine as long as they are only taking kids that score 98% and up. They are now inviting kids that score in the 80s and rejecting kids with 99%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:27 total.
10 White - 37%
8 Black - 30%
5 Hispanic - 19%
2 Two or more races - 7%
1 Asian - 4%

MCPS is 14% Asian and the magnets used to be more than 50% Asian before the changes. What gives? Why were Asian voices shut out of the selection process?


https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/msmagnet/about/MS%20SELECTION%20COMMITTEE%202017-18.pdf
Note the total number by race only adds up to 26 but there are 27 members.

MCPS professional staff is less than 6% Asian.

Yup. 5.7% Asian-American, 12.9% black, 6.6% Hispanic, 73% white, 1.6% more than 1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Again, the creators of tests say they can't meaningfully distinguish within the SEM, usually at least the top 2 percent.

Well that's fine as long as they are only taking kids that score 98% and up. They are now inviting kids that score in the 80s and rejecting kids with 99%.

Where are you getting that information from?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, the creators of tests say they can't meaningfully distinguish within the SEM, usually at least the top 2 percent.

Well that's fine as long as they are only taking kids that score 98% and up. They are now inviting kids that score in the 80s and rejecting kids with 99%.

Where are you getting that information from?

https://montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2019/Enriched%20and%20Accelerated%2028Jan2019%20FINAL.pdf

[Anonymous]

Bored much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Talking about REPRESENTATIVE, why is the percentage of Asians in the Magnets over 50% when they are only 14%?
Now that's the outrage !

Sounds like the test has an unfair cultural bias.

Yep, like including math on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, the creators of tests say they can't meaningfully distinguish within the SEM, usually at least the top 2 percent.

Well that's fine as long as they are only taking kids that score 98% and up. They are now inviting kids that score in the 80s and rejecting kids with 99%.

Where are you getting that information from?

https://montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2019/Enriched%20and%20Accelerated%2028Jan2019%20FINAL.pdf

Wow. For entry into the CES: "Roughly less than half (41.7%) were in the 80th to the 94th percentile on the MAP-M". For the Cogat 34% were in this range. When my kid got into the HGC several years back her scores were in the 130+ on everything (98th, 99th percentile) and 99th percentile on MAP-M/R and she was just barely above average for the center based on the scores of admitted students they provided. The people who were saying that this new system led to more qualified students were clearly wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, the creators of tests say they can't meaningfully distinguish within the SEM, usually at least the top 2 percent.

Well that's fine as long as they are only taking kids that score 98% and up. They are now inviting kids that score in the 80s and rejecting kids with 99%.

Where are you getting that information from?

https://montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2019/Enriched%20and%20Accelerated%2028Jan2019%20FINAL.pdf

Wow. For entry into the CES: "Roughly less than half (41.7%) were in the 80th to the 94th percentile on the MAP-M". For the Cogat 34% were in this range. When my kid got into the HGC several years back her scores were in the 130+ on everything (98th, 99th percentile) and 99th percentile on MAP-M/R and she was just barely above average for the center based on the scores of admitted students they provided. The people who were saying that this new system led to more qualified students were clearly wrong.

This kid has a similar experience getting into the HGC. In case anyone is wondering he did not ‘prep’

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, the creators of tests say they can't meaningfully distinguish within the SEM, usually at least the top 2 percent.

Well that's fine as long as they are only taking kids that score 98% and up. They are now inviting kids that score in the 80s and rejecting kids with 99%.

Where are you getting that information from?

https://montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2019/Enriched%20and%20Accelerated%2028Jan2019%20FINAL.pdf

Wow. For entry into the CES: "Roughly less than half (41.7%) were in the 80th to the 94th percentile on the MAP-M". For the Cogat 34% were in this range. When my kid got into the HGC several years back her scores were in the 130+ on everything (98th, 99th percentile) and 99th percentile on MAP-M/R and she was just barely above average for the center based on the scores of admitted students they provided. The people who were saying that this new system led to more qualified students were clearly wrong.

This kid has a similar experience getting into the HGC. In case anyone is wondering he did not ‘prep’

Sorry. It should read “my kid had a similar experience getting into a HGC”