Did the Takoma MS magnet got MORE white this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since the selection pool was so much larger this year they were able to fill the 100 seats while applying even higher standards. The math is simple.

The top 2.5% of 4000 applicants is better than the top 16% of 600 applicants.

It’s true but there’s a serious case of sour grapes here. People are angry that admissions are more competitive and not as easily gamed.

This is not necessarily true. Expanding the applicant pool and screening more widely was an excellent idea. In theory that should have made admissions more competitive and could have resulted in the county finding highly able candidates who might not have applied in prior years. Unfortunately, it sounds like many students with higher application test scores were rejected in favor of students with lower application test scores based on some BS cohort rationale. The PARRC scores also seem to indicate that around 85% of the students who do well in Math in 5th grade and around 93% of the students who do well in Math in 8th grade come from just 3 groups (white, Asian and mixed race) so simply expanding the pool isn't necessarily going to increase diversity (a valuable goal) unless the school system works harder to ensure that more kids from lower performing groups do better in Math. They need to expand the applicant pool of qualified candidates by improving Math education and Math performance for URMs. They need to do the hard work to close the achievement gap instead of focusing on feel good but ultimately counterproductive measures to change application standards for academically competitive programs.

It's pure speculation on your part that admission wasn't competitive. If there's evidence to the contrary, then post it; otherwise, the numbers we actually know speak for themselves, the top 2..5% of 4000 candidates vs the top 16.5% of 600 candidates is a no-brainer.

only when you assume the 600 is representative of the population when in fact they may include the vast majority of gifted children in the county.

There's no reason to assume the 600 is any different than the 4000. If you have factual evidence to the contrary please share?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since the selection pool was so much larger this year they were able to fill the 100 seats while applying even higher standards. The math is simple.

The top 2.5% of 4000 applicants is better than the top 16% of 600 applicants.

It’s true but there’s a serious case of sour grapes here. People are angry that admissions are more competitive and not as easily gamed.

This is not necessarily true. Expanding the applicant pool and screening more widely was an excellent idea. In theory that should have made admissions more competitive and could have resulted in the county finding highly able candidates who might not have applied in prior years. Unfortunately, it sounds like many students with higher application test scores were rejected in favor of students with lower application test scores based on some BS cohort rationale. The PARRC scores also seem to indicate that around 85% of the students who do well in Math in 5th grade and around 93% of the students who do well in Math in 8th grade come from just 3 groups (white, Asian and mixed race) so simply expanding the pool isn't necessarily going to increase diversity (a valuable goal) unless the school system works harder to ensure that more kids from lower performing groups do better in Math. They need to expand the applicant pool of qualified candidates by improving Math education and Math performance for URMs. They need to do the hard work to close the achievement gap instead of focusing on feel good but ultimately counterproductive measures to change application standards for academically competitive programs.

It's pure speculation on your part that admission wasn't competitive. If there's evidence to the contrary, then post it; otherwise, the numbers we actually know speak for themselves, the top 2..5% of 4000 candidates vs the top 16.5% of 600 candidates is a no-brainer.

only when you assume the 600 is representative of the population when in fact they may include the vast majority of gifted children in the county.

There's no reason to assume the 600 is any different than the 4000. If you have factual evidence to the contrary please share?

Really? 4000 is half of the down county 5th graders? You think they have the same IQ average as the 600 with motivated kids/parents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Really? 4000 is half of the down county 5th graders? You think they have the same IQ average as the 600 with motivated kids/parents?

Having motivated parents doesn't make you smarter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? 4000 is half of the down county 5th graders? You think they have the same IQ average as the 600 with motivated kids/parents?

Having motivated parents doesn't make you smarter.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? 4000 is half of the down county 5th graders? You think they have the same IQ average as the 600 with motivated kids/parents?

Having motivated parents doesn't make you smarter.

True, except who is going to put your child through a complicated application process unless you think the child needs something more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? 4000 is half of the down county 5th graders? You think they have the same IQ average as the 600 with motivated kids/parents?

Having motivated parents doesn't make you smarter.

True, except who is going to put your child through a complicated application process unless you think the child needs something more.

Are you new here? Because....this is really painfully naive and I'm not even that jaded and cynical.

People put their child through a complicated application process because the middle class is terrified that there will be no good jobs by the time our kids are adults, and that there will effectively be no middle class. For that reason, it seems very important to hoard opportunity, so that our children can be in the top 5%, because everyone else will be f**ked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? 4000 is half of the down county 5th graders? You think they have the same IQ average as the 600 with motivated kids/parents?

Having motivated parents doesn't make you smarter.

True, except who is going to put your child through a complicated application process unless you think the child needs something more.

Plenty of people. Lots and lots and lots of people.

To say nothing of the people who don't put their child through a complicated application process because of [reasons] even though the child needs something more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since the selection pool was so much larger this year they were able to fill the 100 seats while applying even higher standards. The math is simple.

The top 2.5% of 4000 applicants is better than the top 16% of 600 applicants.

It’s true but there’s a serious case of sour grapes here. People are angry that admissions are more competitive and not as easily gamed.

This is not necessarily true. Expanding the applicant pool and screening more widely was an excellent idea. In theory that should have made admissions more competitive and could have resulted in the county finding highly able candidates who might not have applied in prior years. Unfortunately, it sounds like many students with higher application test scores were rejected in favor of students with lower application test scores based on some BS cohort rationale. The PARRC scores also seem to indicate that around 85% of the students who do well in Math in 5th grade and around 93% of the students who do well in Math in 8th grade come from just 3 groups (white, Asian and mixed race) so simply expanding the pool isn't necessarily going to increase diversity (a valuable goal) unless the school system works harder to ensure that more kids from lower performing groups do better in Math. They need to expand the applicant pool of qualified candidates by improving Math education and Math performance for URMs. They need to do the hard work to close the achievement gap instead of focusing on feel good but ultimately counterproductive measures to change application standards for academically competitive programs.

It's pure speculation on your part that admission wasn't competitive. If there's evidence to the contrary, then post it; otherwise, the numbers we actually know speak for themselves, the top 2..5% of 4000 candidates vs the top 16.5% of 600 candidates is a no-brainer.

only when you assume the 600 is representative of the population when in fact they may include the vast majority of gifted children in the county.

There's no reason to assume the 600 is any different than the 4000. If you have factual evidence to the contrary please share?

Hahahahha.

[Anonymous]

No worry folks, MCPS will just hemorrhage away its brightest students to the top privates. All MCPS can do is stress the tests. They certainly aren’t stressing teacher challenging material.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? 4000 is half of the down county 5th graders? You think they have the same IQ average as the 600 with motivated kids/parents?

Having motivated parents doesn't make you smarter.

True, except who is going to put your child through a complicated application process unless you think the child needs something more.

Plenty of people. Lots and lots and lots of people.

To say nothing of the people who don't put their child through a complicated application process because of [reasons] even though the child needs something more.

Unfortunately, some parents are clearly upset that magnet admission are now even more competitive and harder to game than in years past.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? 4000 is half of the down county 5th graders? You think they have the same IQ average as the 600 with motivated kids/parents?

Having motivated parents doesn't make you smarter.

True, except who is going to put your child through a complicated application process unless you think the child needs something more.

Every single kid and family that every applied to a private school: Tours, Open houses Interviews, IQ tests, Teacher Recs, Transcripts, Writing samples, Shadow days. Diligence calls. <10% acceptance rate at each intake year.

Having TWO involved and active parents is a huge advantage in a large public school bureaucracy or a small elite private school process. No special program or bussing clueless parents' kids around is going to change nor substitute for real parenting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? 4000 is half of the down county 5th graders? You think they have the same IQ average as the 600 with motivated kids/parents?

Having motivated parents doesn't make you smarter.

True, except who is going to put your child through a complicated application process unless you think the child needs something more.

Plenty of people. Lots and lots and lots of people.

To say nothing of the people who don't put their child through a complicated application process because of [reasons] even though the child needs something more.

Unfortunately, some parents are clearly upset that magnet admission are now even more competitive and harder to game than in years past.

the only new game going on is the significant increase in affirmative action. otherwise it would be merit-based (i.e. test scores and grades).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
the only new game going on is the significant increase in affirmative action. otherwise it would be merit-based (i.e. test scores and grades).

There's that undeserving-kids-got-in-because-of-the-color-of-their-skin thing again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
the only new game going on is the significant increase in affirmative action. otherwise it would be merit-based (i.e. test scores and grades).

There's that undeserving-kids-got-in-because-of-the-color-of-their-skin thing again.

Sure, there's absolutely no evidence to support that belief not to mention that it's completely illegal, but parents who are upset because their children didn't make the cut are looking for answers and that's a convenient scapegoat.

[Anonymous]

Smith said in 2016 that he wanted more blacks and Hispanics in ces and and viola! That’s just what happened.