Did MCPS do a sneaky thing for the magnet lotteries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transparency is not MCPS’s skill set. They will do whatever they can to reach their predetermined goal. MCPS doesn’t care how they impact individual students with their duplicitous agendas.

It's funny I found the information that was on their website in the past thorough and helpful. It seems like a lot of people just jump to these conclusions without ever trying to find answers for themselves.

Speaking of which (NP), it looks like CogAT for Grade 5 select students is November 8-19, 2021.
https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&cx=001338515728546311657:vstdz3h-7gq&q=https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/calendar/0455.21_2021_22_Calendar_Web.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjDhKGRi6LzAhWlElkFHf6dAJ4QFnoECAIQAg&usg=AOvVaw2n6YWnLouhn6gP-vZapG-5

I am not understanding if this is evidence of transparency or lack of transparency? Seems to me that at the minimum it is evidence of poor communication. Is the CogAT for placement or something else? They are so transparent that no one knows what methodology they will use this year. The problem for MCPS is that it is easy for people to infer bad intent because they are continually so sloppy.

Even if they were to explain you'd fail to grasp it and just complain so I understand why they don't bother.

So you can certainly explain to me in detail how they are using CogAT this year and what other criteria are going to applied and how in detail?

You seem to have a problem insulting people but this will be a 3rd year in a row that MCPS has used a different process and the idea that it is well documented is just untrue. Otherwise it would not be a surprise to people that they are administering CogAT this year.

It sounds like they're using the pre-pandemic process. This would make perfect sense.

Yep

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

So you prefer living in a society that pretends that below-average kids who have never proven themselves are above average? Do you want one of them performing heart surgery on you some day or would you prefer the person who proved their qualifications? You wokes pretend that all kids are exactly equal and that the only difference is prep/no prep which is woke lunacy.

No I want to be part of a society where the somewhat below average kid who can afford prep classes can test as gifted and take the spot of an actual gifted kid who can't afford prep classes.

But you don't know that the later is gifted because they don't score in the gifted range. They score in the average range and you wokes take the leap of faith that they 2ould score high of they were only given the chance.

As for the former, again, you wokes only assume that theres no talent there. That's like saying Tom Brady is only great because he practices a lot, not because of his talent. Hint: it's both.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Studying hard is privilege? It sounds like you're lobbying for UMC parents to encourage their kids to study less. And you wonder why no one takes progressives seriously.

Not sure how you're getting this at all. The poster said nothing of the sort. What they said was that some kids can afford classes which give them a huge advantage over kids that canno.

Classes are a part of studying hard. PP laments this. Therefore PP believes studying hard is privilege. Woke insanity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if a student “prepped” which means that they were prepared for enriched learning then that means that they should not receive enriched learning? I’m not sure I’m understanding the argument here.

BTW, my kid went to CES with no “prep” and we don’t know anyone who did.

Yes. Even if the parents encourage kids to learn outside school or even point them in the direction of say a free enrichment resource like Khan Academy, it is inequitable. Because how can a parent who is not educated or doesn't have a fast internet connection compete? In some families there are even two parents. Not fair. Make it all equal first and then we'll see whose kids are actually gifted. How do we measure giftedness after we have equalized everything? I don't know. Why don't we just make it all a lottery and be done with it?

This is getting close to Harrison Bergeron territory.

Probably should just give our kids to the government to take care of immediately after child birth to make sure that no kid was ever given a special advantage from their parents that could aid in success in any way.

Yes. That's the society I want to live in. Right them wrongs.

Yes. That's the society I want to live in. Right them wrongs. -Chairman Mao

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if a student “prepped” which means that they were prepared for enriched learning then that means that they should not receive enriched learning? I’m not sure I’m understanding the argument here.

BTW, my kid went to CES with no “prep” and we don’t know anyone who did.

It's like this: The point of a "GT" program is to identify kids who are gifted. Those who learn differently, not just those who have been exposed to more material by the same age. I'm not a fan of the "cram school" accusations on this thread, because they reek of racist dog whistles, but even without those dog whistles, MCPS is not in the business (nor should they be) of getting into an arms race with parents, in which parents rush to expose kids to more and more material outside of school and school just picks up where RSM left off.

If MCPS truly wants to have a "gifted" program, they have to figure out how to identify kids who learn differently.

Now, in reality, any GT program is going to have a mix of truly gifted kids and just above average hard workers. But the previous system was leaving a lot of talent behind because it was set up in a way to be nearly inaccessible to certain communities. That's what MCPS is trying to address now, with some success.

We have no clue if it's a success and won't until we see where this new cohort ends up in 5-8 years.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

So you prefer living in a society that pretends that below-average kids who have never proven themselves are above average? Do you want one of them performing heart surgery on you some day or would you prefer the person who proved their qualifications? You wokes pretend that all kids are exactly equal and that the only difference is prep/no prep which is woke lunacy.

No I want to be part of a society where the somewhat below average kid who can afford prep classes can test as gifted and take the spot of an actual gifted kid who can't afford prep classes.

But you don't know that the later is gifted because they don't score in the gifted range. They score in the average range and you wokes take the leap of faith that they 2ould score high of they were only given the chance.

As for the former, again, you wokes only assume that theres no talent there. That's like saying Tom Brady is only great because he practices a lot, not because of his talent. Hint: it's both.

Actually they do but with all the inflated scores of the less gifted preppers they get drowned out. There just aren't enough seats.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Studying hard is privilege? It sounds like you're lobbying for UMC parents to encourage their kids to study less. And you wonder why no one takes progressives seriously.

Not sure how you're getting this at all. The poster said nothing of the sort. What they said was that some kids can afford classes which give them a huge advantage over kids that canno.

Classes are a part of studying hard. PP laments this. Therefore PP believes studying hard is privilege. Woke insanity.

I know! What do they have against prep anyway? I mean I paid over $15k to make sure my kids got in and I had to work really hard for that money!

[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.

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.

So you prefer living in a society that pretends that below-average kids who have never proven themselves are above average? Do you want one of them performing heart surgery on you some day or would you prefer the person who proved their qualifications? You wokes pretend that all kids are exactly equal and that the only difference is prep/no prep which is woke lunacy.

No I want to be part of a society where the somewhat below average kid who can afford prep classes can test as gifted and take the spot of an actual gifted kid who can't afford prep classes.

But you don't know that the later is gifted because they don't score in the gifted range. They score in the average range and you wokes take the leap of faith that they 2ould score high of they were only given the chance.

As for the former, again, you wokes only assume that theres no talent there. That's like saying Tom Brady is only great because he practices a lot, not because of his talent. Hint: it's both.

Actually they do but with all the inflated scores of the less gifted preppers they get drowned out. There just aren't enough seats.

Scores inflated by studying? Woke lunacy.

[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.

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.

Studying hard is privilege? It sounds like you're lobbying for UMC parents to encourage their kids to study less. And you wonder why no one takes progressives seriously.

Not sure how you're getting this at all. The poster said nothing of the sort. What they said was that some kids can afford classes which give them a huge advantage over kids that canno.

Classes are a part of studying hard. PP laments this. Therefore PP believes studying hard is privilege. Woke insanity.

I know! What do they have against prep anyway? I mean I paid over $15k to make sure my kids got in and I had to work really hard for that money!

I'm surprised you had $15k to spend living in Wheaton and all.

[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.

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.

So you prefer living in a society that pretends that below-average kids who have never proven themselves are above average? Do you want one of them performing heart surgery on you some day or would you prefer the person who proved their qualifications? You wokes pretend that all kids are exactly equal and that the only difference is prep/no prep which is woke lunacy.

No I want to be part of a society where the somewhat below average kid who can afford prep classes can test as gifted and take the spot of an actual gifted kid who can't afford prep classes.

But you don't know that the later is gifted because they don't score in the gifted range. They score in the average range and you wokes take the leap of faith that they 2ould score high of they were only given the chance.

As for the former, again, you wokes only assume that theres no talent there. That's like saying Tom Brady is only great because he practices a lot, not because of his talent. Hint: it's both.

Actually they do but with all the inflated scores of the less gifted preppers they get drowned out. There just aren't enough seats.

I imagine it's difficult to distinguish the well prepped from the gifted especially with how popular these prep sites are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transparency is not MCPS’s skill set. They will do whatever they can to reach their predetermined goal. MCPS doesn’t care how they impact individual students with their duplicitous agendas.

It's funny I found the information that was on their website in the past thorough and helpful. It seems like a lot of people just jump to these conclusions without ever trying to find answers for themselves.

Speaking of which (NP), it looks like CogAT for Grade 5 select students is November 8-19, 2021.
https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&cx=001338515728546311657:vstdz3h-7gq&q=https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/calendar/0455.21_2021_22_Calendar_Web.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjDhKGRi6LzAhWlElkFHf6dAJ4QFnoECAIQAg&usg=AOvVaw2n6YWnLouhn6gP-vZapG-5

I am not understanding if this is evidence of transparency or lack of transparency? Seems to me that at the minimum it is evidence of poor communication. Is the CogAT for placement or something else? They are so transparent that no one knows what methodology they will use this year. The problem for MCPS is that it is easy for people to infer bad intent because they are continually so sloppy.

Even if they were to explain you'd fail to grasp it and just complain so I understand why they don't bother.

So you can certainly explain to me in detail how they are using CogAT this year and what other criteria are going to applied and how in detail?

You seem to have a problem insulting people but this will be a 3rd year in a row that MCPS has used a different process and the idea that it is well documented is just untrue. Otherwise it would not be a surprise to people that they are administering CogAT this year.

MCPS is just trying to keep all the preppers guessing and spending more money. Support the educational-industrial complex and all that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

So you prefer living in a society that pretends that below-average kids who have never proven themselves are above average? Do you want one of them performing heart surgery on you some day or would you prefer the person who proved their qualifications? You wokes pretend that all kids are exactly equal and that the only difference is prep/no prep which is woke lunacy.

No I want to be part of a society where the somewhat below average kid who can afford prep classes can test as gifted and take the spot of an actual gifted kid who can't afford prep classes.

But you don't know that the later is gifted because they don't score in the gifted range. They score in the average range and you wokes take the leap of faith that they 2ould score high of they were only given the chance.

As for the former, again, you wokes only assume that theres no talent there. That's like saying Tom Brady is only great because he practices a lot, not because of his talent. Hint: it's both.

Actually they do but with all the inflated scores of the less gifted preppers they get drowned out. There just aren't enough seats.

I imagine it's difficult to distinguish the well prepped from the gifted especially with how popular these prep sites are.

You do realize that the preppers are only competing with other Asian kids right?

[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.

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.

So you prefer living in a society that pretends that below-average kids who have never proven themselves are above average? Do you want one of them performing heart surgery on you some day or would you prefer the person who proved their qualifications? You wokes pretend that all kids are exactly equal and that the only difference is prep/no prep which is woke lunacy.

No I want to be part of a society where the somewhat below average kid who can afford prep classes can test as gifted and take the spot of an actual gifted kid who can't afford prep classes.

But you don't know that the later is gifted because they don't score in the gifted range. They score in the average range and you wokes take the leap of faith that they 2ould score high of they were only given the chance.

As for the former, again, you wokes only assume that theres no talent there. That's like saying Tom Brady is only great because he practices a lot, not because of his talent. Hint: it's both.

Actually they do but with all the inflated scores of the less gifted preppers they get drowned out. There just aren't enough seats.

They don't. They're letting some kids in the ghetto schools into the program with an 85%. That's average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

So you prefer living in a society that pretends that below-average kids who have never proven themselves are above average? Do you want one of them performing heart surgery on you some day or would you prefer the person who proved their qualifications? You wokes pretend that all kids are exactly equal and that the only difference is prep/no prep which is woke lunacy.

No I want to be part of a society where the somewhat below average kid who can afford prep classes can test as gifted and take the spot of an actual gifted kid who can't afford prep classes.

But you don't know that the later is gifted because they don't score in the gifted range. They score in the average range and you wokes take the leap of faith that they 2ould score high of they were only given the chance.

As for the former, again, you wokes only assume that theres no talent there. That's like saying Tom Brady is only great because he practices a lot, not because of his talent. Hint: it's both.

Actually they do but with all the inflated scores of the less gifted preppers they get drowned out. There just aren't enough seats.

They don't. They're letting some kids in the ghetto schools into the program with an 85%. That's average.

So CCES is a ghetto school now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transparency is not MCPS’s skill set. They will do whatever they can to reach their predetermined goal. MCPS doesn’t care how they impact individual students with their duplicitous agendas.

It's funny I found the information that was on their website in the past thorough and helpful. It seems like a lot of people just jump to these conclusions without ever trying to find answers for themselves.

Speaking of which (NP), it looks like CogAT for Grade 5 select students is November 8-19, 2021.
https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&cx=001338515728546311657:vstdz3h-7gq&q=https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/calendar/0455.21_2021_22_Calendar_Web.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjDhKGRi6LzAhWlElkFHf6dAJ4QFnoECAIQAg&usg=AOvVaw2n6YWnLouhn6gP-vZapG-5

I am not understanding if this is evidence of transparency or lack of transparency? Seems to me that at the minimum it is evidence of poor communication. Is the CogAT for placement or something else? They are so transparent that no one knows what methodology they will use this year. The problem for MCPS is that it is easy for people to infer bad intent because they are continually so sloppy.

Even if they were to explain you'd fail to grasp it and just complain so I understand why they don't bother.

So you can certainly explain to me in detail how they are using CogAT this year and what other criteria are going to applied and how in detail?

You seem to have a problem insulting people but this will be a 3rd year in a row that MCPS has used a different process and the idea that it is well documented is just untrue. Otherwise it would not be a surprise to people that they are administering CogAT this year.

It sounds like they're using the pre-pandemic process. This would make perfect sense.

Yep

And this is clearly explained on their website? Obviously no.