Independent schools and "advanced" kids: national problem?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is it a cheap shot at a kid to say that his or her parent seems to think that the kid's only shot at an elite school is winning a national math competition and maybe that's true for this kid but it's not true for other kids?

It's a (negative) commentary on the parent's tunnel vision and/or a positive assumption about the kid's mathematical abilities.

She didn't say that at all about her own kid. It's a cheap shot to put words into her mouth, like you're doing just now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is it a cheap shot at a kid to say that his or her parent seems to think that the kid's only shot at an elite school is winning a national math competition and maybe that's true for this kid but it's not true for other kids?

It's a (negative) commentary on the parent's tunnel vision and/or a positive assumption about the kid's mathematical abilities.

She didn't say that at all about her own kid. It's a cheap shot to put words into her mouth, like you're doing just now.

Same poster. Forgot to add: veni, vidi, vici.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What are you talking about?!? This "word stew" doesn't even make logical sense. Please come post some more when you've collected your thoughts and are prepared to articulate them in some logical fashion.

Don't worry. I wouldn't sweat it. Your difficulty in comprehension is abundantly understandable.

Humor me for a minute: are you from NIH?

[Anonymous]

How is it a cheap shot at a kid to say that his or her parent seems to think that the kid's only shot at an elite school is winning a national math competition and maybe that's true for this kid but it's not true for other kids?

It's a (negative) commentary on the parent's tunnel vision and/or a positive assumption about the kid's mathematical abilities.

Which parent made this claim? Can you provide the direct quote of the parent that stated "my kid's only shot at an elite school is winning a national math competition". This is a rather simple task. Try and focus a little and provide the specific direct quote. This is not a license for purple passion and mental incontinence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New Poster Here: Have a MS DS in private school. The school is excellent in many ways, but the math is just lamentable. He is in the top math track, but the pace fails to inspire or challenge, and it is frustrating him on a daily basis. So, I am starting to explore public magnets in MD. So, here are my questions, for those that have done the switch:

1. How can I tell if DC is in the right ability range? How do you know when you have a "math kid," as opposed to a kid who is just very good at math?

2. Where the best place to find out about magnets/testing? Open houses?

3. What do you know now about the transition from private to magnet that you wish you had known before doing it?

Thank you for your responses.

We made the switch from private to magnets, and we know another family who did too. The best strategy may be to apply for the magnets (in the fall before the year of entrance) and then if it works out, great, and if it doesn't, you can stay with your private.

The magnet schools have open houses in the early fall of the year prior to admission. You need to download the magnet application packet from the MoCo website, complete the essays and transcript requests, and then your kid needs to take a test in early December. The odds of getting in aren't terrific, however.

If your DS is already in middle school, then you would be applying for the Blair math magnet. A word of warning: the Blair math/science magnet is very, very intense, and requires a fierce dedication to math and/or science (my HS kid is in a different MoCo magnet, but this is what she hears from magnet friends). If you applied to Richard Montgomery instead, your kid could do advanced math (most of the RM kids are doing advanced math) within the context of a challenging IB program.

[Anonymous]

Humor me for a minute: are you from NIH?

More psychological and mental diarrhea.

Humor the Board and see if you can focus for just one moment and provide the alledged quote?

If you can't you might consider bowing out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Humor me for a minute: are you from NIH?

More psychological and mental diarrhea.

Humor the Board and see if you can focus for just one moment and provide the alledged quote?

If you can't you might consider bowing out.

You've got the wrong person -- there are more than one of us. You do bear a close resemblance to the NIH poster that Jeff criticized. If you remember her, she harassed people and made bogus psychological diagnoses. Here's my message to you: stop doing this or I'll post a link to this thread on the "Don't Sock Puppet" thread, so that Jeff can look into this.

Seriously.

[Anonymous]

Do not make idle threats here. Run to your boss. It's not necessary to alert any poster.

[Anonymous]

The mark of a coward that sock puppets herself in pathetic desperation. She makes grandiose accusations of others and can't provide direct quotes or defend the inaccurate statements.

Humor me for a moment. Are you from GW?

[Anonymous]

The mark of a "spineless" coward that sock puppets herself in pathetic desperation. She makes grandiose accusations of others and can't provide direct quotes or defend the inaccurate statements.

Humor me for a moment. Are you from GW?

To be perfectly clear, the above response refers to the poster below:

You've got the wrong person -- there are more than one of us. You do bear a close resemblance to the NIH poster that Jeff criticized. If you remember her, she harassed people and made bogus psychological diagnoses. Here's my message to you: stop doing this or I'll post a link to this thread on the "Don't Sock Puppet" thread, so that Jeff can look into this.

Seriously.

[Anonymous]

I think some of you are men. Not that there's anything wrong with that! Or if you're women you sure write like men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The mark of a coward that sock puppets herself in pathetic desperation. She makes grandiose accusations of others and can't provide direct quotes or defend the inaccurate statements.

Humor me for a moment. Are you from GW?

Wow, you just outed yourself! For those of you who don't know what she's talking about: http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/75/89170.page

I'm most certainly not from GW.

Can we get past this drivel now, and back to our regularly scheduled programming? I'd vote for leaving the TPMS debate behind us -- whether the NIH poster hates TPMS, for whatever reasons, doesn't seem material for the rest of us. And at least from my perspective the math test argument (which I didn't have a dog in) has been sufficiently canvassed. Although heck, if somebody wants to discuss it, don't let me dissuade folks from returning to any type of actual substance.

Somebody did ask about how to get into magnets, and my last post before trying to drive this nuts NIH person away was to try to provide info about how to get into the magnets. I think that person has been scared off, unfortunately.

[Anonymous]

Wow, you just outed yourself! For those of you who don't know what she's talking about: http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/75/89170.page

I'm most certainly not from GW.

Can we get past this drivel now, and back to our regularly scheduled programming? I'd vote for leaving the TPMS debate behind us -- whether the NIH poster hates TPMS, for whatever reasons, doesn't seem material for the rest of us. And at least from my perspective the math test argument (which I didn't have a dog in) has been sufficiently canvassed. Although heck, if somebody wants to discuss it, don't let me dissuade folks from returning to any type of actual substance.

Somebody did ask about how to get into magnets, and my last post before trying to drive this nuts NIH person away was to try to provide info about how to get into the magnets. I think that person has been scared off, unfortunately.

Are you from GW?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think some of you are men. Not that there's anything wrong with that! Or if you're women you sure write like men.

Not me. I do write professionally, though (not for GW so my style tends to be pretty crisp and clear. Some might think this is a masculine characteristic, but it's probably similar to anybody who needs to get technical information across in a readable way.

[Anonymous]

Wow, you just outed yourself! For those of you who don't know what she's talking about: http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/75/89170.page

I'm most certainly not from GW.

Can we get past this drivel now, and back to our regularly scheduled programming? I'd vote for leaving the TPMS debate behind us -- whether the NIH poster hates TPMS, for whatever reasons, doesn't seem material for the rest of us. And at least from my perspective the math test argument (which I didn't have a dog in) has been sufficiently canvassed. Although heck, if somebody wants to discuss it, don't let me dissuade folks from returning to any type of actual substance.

Somebody did ask about how to get into magnets, and my last post before trying to drive this nuts NIH person away was to try to provide info about how to get into the magnets. I think that person has been scared off, unfortunately.

On the contrary, I doubt the poster in question is the one slamming TPMS! Nice smokescreen.