Did MCPS do a sneaky thing for the magnet lotteries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transparency is not MCPS strong suit. It’s why so many parents are fed up with the MCPS propaganda and BS. The lack of transparency is why people no longer trust the school system.

MCPS determines what they want the outcome to be then comes up with the smoke and mirrors so the predetermined outcome becomes a reality. Most parents are sheep and don’t want to question MCPS or rock the boat at their school.

+1

That's an i interesting opinion and maybe it makes you feel better to believe it, but there's no evidence to support it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what percent of each group take private math courses? I suspect the taking of private math courses correlates far more with 5s than does race.

You may be right, but not sure that matters. They're ignoring the details of the process like local morning which explains the delta that they're pointing to as evidence of rigging. I think they're just heavily vested in this narrative and are in heavy denial of reality.

Doesn't make the data wrong. PP just presented the data and it is pretty clear it disadvantages and penalizes a particular racial minority group for good performance. I don't think it is fair but I am not particularly bothered by it. Eventually work doesn't go waste. Just have the grace though to accept the facts. It is obvious what's happening here - could be because of local mooring which happened for a reason.

The reason for local norming is a nationwide shift towards policies that reward the top percentile students based on their home school, not their entire district. It's a sea change, it's everywhere.

And it seems much more fair than simply handing out seats at these programs to the children of people whose kids attend prep. It seems more fair to reward actual talent which is distributed evenly if opportunities aren't.

A very large assumption with very little science to back it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what percent of each group take private math courses? I suspect the taking of private math courses correlates far more with 5s than does race.

You may be right, but not sure that matters. They're ignoring the details of the process like local morning which explains the delta that they're pointing to as evidence of rigging. I think they're just heavily vested in this narrative and are in heavy denial of reality.

Doesn't make the data wrong. PP just presented the data and it is pretty clear it disadvantages and penalizes a particular racial minority group for good performance. I don't think it is fair but I am not particularly bothered by it. Eventually work doesn't go waste. Just have the grace though to accept the facts. It is obvious what's happening here - could be because of local mooring which happened for a reason.

The reason for local norming is a nationwide shift towards policies that reward the top percentile students based on their home school, not their entire district. It's a sea change, it's everywhere.

Can you provide examples from other school districts applying this same methodology?

Local norming is when "the criteria for gifted is set at the top 5 percent of a school instead of the top 5 percent of the nation" https://www.nagc.org/blog/local-norms-improve-equity-gifted-identification.

The theory is that schools traditionally with higher percentages of Black and Hispanic children would have a higher number of "gifted" identified in those racial categories.

Kentucky has a few examples. Not sure about anywhere else.

However, even the experts caution against applying it without certain adjustments.

"users of local norms must recognize that being gifted or advanced within a local comparison may not mean the student is prepared for the rigor of advanced classes."

"using local norms may harm those who would be identified using national norms. Address this issue by identifying all students who meet the national norms as well as the underrepresented students who meet group-specific norms."

https://www.wku.edu/gifted/rap/using-local-norms.pdf provide example.

Unfortunately, MCPS doesn't do this. MCPS actively discriminates - for example, when they don't select a 99th percentile asian for the magnet program. That's racism.

I'm all for using local norms. Many people believe these schools are not all the same. Some even pay hundreds of thousands more for a home in boundary of one of these good schools because they believe it confers an advantage. This is one of the things that local norms would address. They make sure that all get to children have a fair chance. This is simply selecting students using merit based on the opportunities that were available to them. What I do not like is using a random lottery their results in a much weaker cohort.

Yep. Do the local norming but do proper testing too to enable a fair, measurable process. Not some random lottery. Doesn't help anyone. Get the best kids from local schools AND the best kids from the county. Win win. This doesn't need to get political or weaken the schools. Diversity with performance and excellence is very much possible given the right intent. As of seems like MCPS just wants to take short cuts.

I agree but I'd also create more MS magnets to ensure that kids that need this kind of thing all get it. Not just some random subset. Also doing this could help reduce the bussing costs by reducing travel time.

Yep. I wonder if someone has done an analysis on bussing costs that can be saved. Either way, the investment will be well worth it for the community.

And there are underenrolled middle schools, like Westland and Shady Grove with hundreds of empty seats each, that would be much more conveniently located for lots of families.

That's also a good reason to finally do the boundary analysis that is 40 years overdue. They can likely reduce busing costs while improving diversity. This is a good thing. Sure, there may be some change but if anything I'd expect people to be assigned to a school that is closer if anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what percent of each group take private math courses? I suspect the taking of private math courses correlates far more with 5s than does race.

You may be right, but not sure that matters. They're ignoring the details of the process like local morning which explains the delta that they're pointing to as evidence of rigging. I think they're just heavily vested in this narrative and are in heavy denial of reality.

Doesn't make the data wrong. PP just presented the data and it is pretty clear it disadvantages and penalizes a particular racial minority group for good performance. I don't think it is fair but I am not particularly bothered by it. Eventually work doesn't go waste. Just have the grace though to accept the facts. It is obvious what's happening here - could be because of local mooring which happened for a reason.

The reason for local norming is a nationwide shift towards policies that reward the top percentile students based on their home school, not their entire district. It's a sea change, it's everywhere.

And it seems much more fair than simply handing out seats at these programs to the children of people whose kids attend prep. It seems more fair to reward actual talent which is distributed evenly if opportunities aren't.

A very large assumption with very little science to back it up.

Except everyone knows it's true. Didn't a cram school bus pickup at Cold Spring? And wasn't that the school that always sent the most kids to the magnet every year under the old system? It really isn't a stretch at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what percent of each group take private math courses? I suspect the taking of private math courses correlates far more with 5s than does race.

You may be right, but not sure that matters. They're ignoring the details of the process like local morning which explains the delta that they're pointing to as evidence of rigging. I think they're just heavily vested in this narrative and are in heavy denial of reality.

Doesn't make the data wrong. PP just presented the data and it is pretty clear it disadvantages and penalizes a particular racial minority group for good performance. I don't think it is fair but I am not particularly bothered by it. Eventually work doesn't go waste. Just have the grace though to accept the facts. It is obvious what's happening here - could be because of local mooring which happened for a reason.

The reason for local norming is a nationwide shift towards policies that reward the top percentile students based on their home school, not their entire district. It's a sea change, it's everywhere.

And it seems much more fair than simply handing out seats at these programs to the children of people whose kids attend prep. It seems more fair to reward actual talent which is distributed evenly if opportunities aren't.

Nothing was handed out. Those kids earned those spots by proving they could do the work. Under the new system, MCPS is hoping that kids who haven't proven anything can do the work. Hint: they can't. This is a race to the bottom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transparency is not MCPS strong suit. It’s why so many parents are fed up with the MCPS propaganda and BS. The lack of transparency is why people no longer trust the school system.

MCPS determines what they want the outcome to be then comes up with the smoke and mirrors so the predetermined outcome becomes a reality. Most parents are sheep and don’t want to question MCPS or rock the boat at their school.

+1

That's an i interesting opinion and maybe it makes you feel better to believe it, but there's no evidence to support it.

The reason there's not much evidence is that the selection process is as transparent as muddy water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what percent of each group take private math courses? I suspect the taking of private math courses correlates far more with 5s than does race.

You may be right, but not sure that matters. They're ignoring the details of the process like local morning which explains the delta that they're pointing to as evidence of rigging. I think they're just heavily vested in this narrative and are in heavy denial of reality.

Doesn't make the data wrong. PP just presented the data and it is pretty clear it disadvantages and penalizes a particular racial minority group for good performance. I don't think it is fair but I am not particularly bothered by it. Eventually work doesn't go waste. Just have the grace though to accept the facts. It is obvious what's happening here - could be because of local mooring which happened for a reason.

The reason for local norming is a nationwide shift towards policies that reward the top percentile students based on their home school, not their entire district. It's a sea change, it's everywhere.

And it seems much more fair than simply handing out seats at these programs to the children of people whose kids attend prep. It seems more fair to reward actual talent which is distributed evenly if opportunities aren't.

And you wonder why no one takes progressives seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transparency is not MCPS strong suit. It’s why so many parents are fed up with the MCPS propaganda and BS. The lack of transparency is why people no longer trust the school system.

MCPS determines what they want the outcome to be then comes up with the smoke and mirrors so the predetermined outcome becomes a reality. Most parents are sheep and don’t want to question MCPS or rock the boat at their school.

+1

That's an i interesting opinion and maybe it makes you feel better to believe it, but there's no evidence to support it.

The reason there's not much evidence is that the selection process is as transparent as muddy water.

The selection process is clearly documented it has been for years. Just because you don't want to hear it doesn't make it untrue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what percent of each group take private math courses? I suspect the taking of private math courses correlates far more with 5s than does race.

You may be right, but not sure that matters. They're ignoring the details of the process like local morning which explains the delta that they're pointing to as evidence of rigging. I think they're just heavily vested in this narrative and are in heavy denial of reality.

Doesn't make the data wrong. PP just presented the data and it is pretty clear it disadvantages and penalizes a particular racial minority group for good performance. I don't think it is fair but I am not particularly bothered by it. Eventually work doesn't go waste. Just have the grace though to accept the facts. It is obvious what's happening here - could be because of local mooring which happened for a reason.

The reason for local norming is a nationwide shift towards policies that reward the top percentile students based on their home school, not their entire district. It's a sea change, it's everywhere.

And it seems much more fair than simply handing out seats at these programs to the children of people whose kids attend prep. It seems more fair to reward actual talent which is distributed evenly if opportunities aren't.

Nothing was handed out. Those kids earned those spots by proving they could do the work. Under the new system, MCPS is hoping that kids who haven't proven anything can do the work. Hint: they can't. This is a race to the bottom.

I get it. It's hard to give up privilege. Being able to rig the outcome by enrolling in a few prep classes makes admission easy, doesn't favor the wealthy and inserts uncertainty into a stressful process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what percent of each group take private math courses? I suspect the taking of private math courses correlates far more with 5s than does race.

You may be right, but not sure that matters. They're ignoring the details of the process like local morning which explains the delta that they're pointing to as evidence of rigging. I think they're just heavily vested in this narrative and are in heavy denial of reality.

Doesn't make the data wrong. PP just presented the data and it is pretty clear it disadvantages and penalizes a particular racial minority group for good performance. I don't think it is fair but I am not particularly bothered by it. Eventually work doesn't go waste. Just have the grace though to accept the facts. It is obvious what's happening here - could be because of local mooring which happened for a reason.

The reason for local norming is a nationwide shift towards policies that reward the top percentile students based on their home school, not their entire district. It's a sea change, it's everywhere.

And it seems much more fair than simply handing out seats at these programs to the children of people whose kids attend prep. It seems more fair to reward actual talent which is distributed evenly if opportunities aren't.

Nothing was handed out. Those kids earned those spots by proving they could do the work. Under the new system, MCPS is hoping that kids who haven't proven anything can do the work. Hint: they can't. This is a race to the bottom.

I think the problem is that allocating magnet seats for 9 year olds, or 11 year olds, based on whether their families had the resources to expose them to the material ALREADY so that they could "prove" that they could "do the work" is simply perpetuating inequality.

I don't want to be part of a society that determines that kids do not deserve enrichment and acceleration if they have not already received that enrichment from the private sector before they hit 4th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transparency is not MCPS strong suit. It’s why so many parents are fed up with the MCPS propaganda and BS. The lack of transparency is why people no longer trust the school system.

MCPS determines what they want the outcome to be then comes up with the smoke and mirrors so the predetermined outcome becomes a reality. Most parents are sheep and don’t want to question MCPS or rock the boat at their school.

+1

That's an i interesting opinion and maybe it makes you feel better to believe it, but there's no evidence to support it.

The reason there's not much evidence is that the selection process is as transparent as muddy water.

The selection process is clearly documented it has been for years. Just because you don't want to hear it doesn't make it untrue.

This is factually untrue. It’s weird that you feel the need to lie about this. There are plenty of threads that demonstrate the lack of transparency in the process. You can start here if you like.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/951999.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transparency is not MCPS strong suit. It’s why so many parents are fed up with the MCPS propaganda and BS. The lack of transparency is why people no longer trust the school system.

MCPS determines what they want the outcome to be then comes up with the smoke and mirrors so the predetermined outcome becomes a reality. Most parents are sheep and don’t want to question MCPS or rock the boat at their school.

+1

That's an i interesting opinion and maybe it makes you feel better to believe it, but there's no evidence to support it.

The reason there's not much evidence is that the selection process is as transparent as muddy water.

The selection process is clearly documented it has been for years. Just because you don't want to hear it doesn't make it untrue.

This is factually untrue. It’s weird that you feel the need to lie about this. There are plenty of threads that demonstrate the lack of transparency in the process. You can start here if you like.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/951999.page

Actually it is all clearly laid out on their website even if you want to pretend it isn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what percent of each group take private math courses? I suspect the taking of private math courses correlates far more with 5s than does race.

You may be right, but not sure that matters. They're ignoring the details of the process like local morning which explains the delta that they're pointing to as evidence of rigging. I think they're just heavily vested in this narrative and are in heavy denial of reality.

Doesn't make the data wrong. PP just presented the data and it is pretty clear it disadvantages and penalizes a particular racial minority group for good performance. I don't think it is fair but I am not particularly bothered by it. Eventually work doesn't go waste. Just have the grace though to accept the facts. It is obvious what's happening here - could be because of local mooring which happened for a reason.

The reason for local norming is a nationwide shift towards policies that reward the top percentile students based on their home school, not their entire district. It's a sea change, it's everywhere.

And it seems much more fair than simply handing out seats at these programs to the children of people whose kids attend prep. It seems more fair to reward actual talent which is distributed evenly if opportunities aren't.

Nothing was handed out. Those kids earned those spots by proving they could do the work. Under the new system, MCPS is hoping that kids who haven't proven anything can do the work. Hint: they can't. This is a race to the bottom.

I know what you mean. I spent over $15k in prep classes for so my kids could get in. That isn't handing things out at all. It's downright expensive!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what percent of each group take private math courses? I suspect the taking of private math courses correlates far more with 5s than does race.

You may be right, but not sure that matters. They're ignoring the details of the process like local morning which explains the delta that they're pointing to as evidence of rigging. I think they're just heavily vested in this narrative and are in heavy denial of reality.

Doesn't make the data wrong. PP just presented the data and it is pretty clear it disadvantages and penalizes a particular racial minority group for good performance. I don't think it is fair but I am not particularly bothered by it. Eventually work doesn't go waste. Just have the grace though to accept the facts. It is obvious what's happening here - could be because of local mooring which happened for a reason.

The reason for local norming is a nationwide shift towards policies that reward the top percentile students based on their home school, not their entire district. It's a sea change, it's everywhere.

And it seems much more fair than simply handing out seats at these programs to the children of people whose kids attend prep. It seems more fair to reward actual talent which is distributed evenly if opportunities aren't.

Nothing was handed out. Those kids earned those spots by proving they could do the work. Under the new system, MCPS is hoping that kids who haven't proven anything can do the work. Hint: they can't. This is a race to the bottom.

I know what you mean. I spent over $15k in prep classes for so my kids could get in. That isn't handing things out at all. It's downright expensive!

Not what you're determined to believe, but many of us have kids who've attended magnets with zero prep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transparency is not MCPS strong suit. It’s why so many parents are fed up with the MCPS propaganda and BS. The lack of transparency is why people no longer trust the school system.

MCPS determines what they want the outcome to be then comes up with the smoke and mirrors so the predetermined outcome becomes a reality. Most parents are sheep and don’t want to question MCPS or rock the boat at their school.

+1

That's an i interesting opinion and maybe it makes you feel better to believe it, but there's no evidence to support it.

The reason there's not much evidence is that the selection process is as transparent as muddy water.

The selection process is clearly documented it has been for years. Just because you don't want to hear it doesn't make it untrue.

This is factually untrue. It’s weird that you feel the need to lie about this. There are plenty of threads that demonstrate the lack of transparency in the process. You can start here if you like.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/951999.page

Actually it is all clearly laid out on their website even if you want to pretend it isn't.

LOL. You must be new to this or an MCPS employee. Just read the comments and consider the implications. “Clearly laid out” LOL.

I'm still trying to figure out why my daughter with 255 MAP-M from an East County CES wasn't even in the TPMS pool.