Magnet high schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My RMIB kid did not prep either. He's always been a 99 percentile test taker.

My RMIB kid didn't prep much either but pretty much everyone else they know in the program had years of outside prep. It's a sad reality that few students are able to access these programs without prep because it's so widespread in some quarters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My RMIB kid did not prep either. He's always been a 99 percentile test taker.

Mine did! They started in 3rd grade 2 hours a day 5 days a week, but no way they would've been admitted without it.

And that's fine too. I don't see why people try to make prep-families feel guilty about helping their kids get in. We did and, looking at how it helped our kids in HS, college, and after college, we would do it again! Yes, they are older.

Prep is perfectly fine but shouldn't be required to access enriched opportunities from publicly funded programs. When the majority of those being accepted were enrolled in outside prep, it's time to rethink our admission process so that all students have a shot at these opportunities, not just those families that can spend the $$$ to purchase a seat.

Game seems always unfair when you can't win. What a cynical view.

And some people will say anything to maintain their privilege that gives them a big leg up on everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My RMIB kid did not prep either. He's always been a 99 percentile test taker.

Mine did! They started in 3rd grade 2 hours a day 5 days a week, but no way they would've been admitted without it.

And that's fine too. I don't see why people try to make prep-families feel guilty about helping their kids get in. We did and, looking at how it helped our kids in HS, college, and after college, we would do it again! Yes, they are older.

Prep is perfectly fine but shouldn't be required to access enriched opportunities from publicly funded programs. When the majority of those being accepted were enrolled in outside prep, it's time to rethink our admission process so that all students have a shot at these opportunities, not just those families that can spend the $$$ to purchase a seat.

Game seems always unfair when you can't win. What a cynical view.

And some people will say anything to maintain their privilege that gives them a big leg up on everyone else.

Yes, some of us worked hard to make sure we can provide for our kids. What's wrong with that? Isn't that your job as a parent? Your inability to provide is no one's fault except you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My RMIB kid did not prep either. He's always been a 99 percentile test taker.

Mine did! They started in 3rd grade 2 hours a day 5 days a week, but no way they would've been admitted without it.

And that's fine too. I don't see why people try to make prep-families feel guilty about helping their kids get in. We did and, looking at how it helped our kids in HS, college, and after college, we would do it again! Yes, they are older.

Prep is perfectly fine but shouldn't be required to access enriched opportunities from publicly funded programs. When the majority of those being accepted were enrolled in outside prep, it's time to rethink our admission process so that all students have a shot at these opportunities, not just those families that can spend the $$$ to purchase a seat.

Game seems always unfair when you can't win. What a cynical view.

And some people will say anything to maintain their privilege that gives them a big leg up on everyone else.

Yes, some of us worked hard to make sure we can provide for our kids. What's wrong with that? Isn't that your job as a parent? Your inability to provide is no one's fault except you.

You are absolutely blind to both the systemic barriers and person tragedies many people face. My parents had to deal with segregated education and then my mom almost died from cancer. They weren’t lazy or stupid or uncaring, but they could not provide better for me than they did. I graduated college with a huge debt which has affected housing choices I had to make my family. And here, housing affects what schools you can access.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My RMIB kid did not prep either. He's always been a 99 percentile test taker.

Mine did! They started in 3rd grade 2 hours a day 5 days a week, but no way they would've been admitted without it.

And that's fine too. I don't see why people try to make prep-families feel guilty about helping their kids get in. We did and, looking at how it helped our kids in HS, college, and after college, we would do it again! Yes, they are older.

Prep is perfectly fine but shouldn't be required to access enriched opportunities from publicly funded programs. When the majority of those being accepted were enrolled in outside prep, it's time to rethink our admission process so that all students have a shot at these opportunities, not just those families that can spend the $$$ to purchase a seat.

Game seems always unfair when you can't win. What a cynical view.

And some people will say anything to maintain their privilege that gives them a big leg up on everyone else.

Yes, some of us worked hard to make sure we can provide for our kids. What's wrong with that? Isn't that your job as a parent? Your inability to provide is no one's fault except you.

It's completely fine to spend thousands of your dollars prepping your kids, but it shouldn't be a requirement to unlock enrichment opportunities within the public school system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My RMIB kid did not prep either. He's always been a 99 percentile test taker.

Mine did! They started in 3rd grade 2 hours a day 5 days a week, but no way they would've been admitted without it.

And that's fine too. I don't see why people try to make prep-families feel guilty about helping their kids get in. We did and, looking at how it helped our kids in HS, college, and after college, we would do it again! Yes, they are older.

Prep is perfectly fine but shouldn't be required to access enriched opportunities from publicly funded programs. When the majority of those being accepted were enrolled in outside prep, it's time to rethink our admission process so that all students have a shot at these opportunities, not just those families that can spend the $$$ to purchase a seat.

Game seems always unfair when you can't win. What a cynical view.

And some people will say anything to maintain their privilege that gives them a big leg up on everyone else.

Yes, some of us worked hard to make sure we can provide for our kids. What's wrong with that? Isn't that your job as a parent? Your inability to provide is no one's fault except you.

You are absolutely blind to both the systemic barriers and person tragedies many people face. My parents had to deal with segregated education and then my mom almost died from cancer. They weren’t lazy or stupid or uncaring, but they could not provide better for me than they did. I graduated college with a huge debt which has affected housing choices I had to make my family. And here, housing affects what schools you can access.

Listen, I am not even sure why you are picking a fight with me. You do what you have to do to best support your kids. I came to this county when I was 15 with $125 in my pocket. I was looked down at, cursed at, spited at... So don't tell me about the systematic barriers... I've experienced it, seen it, and had to live thru it. But, at the end of the day, you still got to keep pushing forward. Looking back won't help you. Anyway, I am not even sure why we are talking about this. Good day.

[Anonymous]

How about all the families that just choose not to prep but spend tons of time and $$ on sports? Should they be excluded from varsity level play because they prepped?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A coworker told me that no one gets in without prep. Well my kid did. From his circle of Blair friends, there was one child who was prepped. While there are families who prep, I also think people use that idea to justify why their kid did not get in. In reality it is like very competitive colleges. Lots of very talented kids just don't get in.

I don't think it is appropriate to use the cohort method for HS students since in HS there are many levels of classes available. In middle school there is much less differentiation (or none).

Maybe 25%-30% manage without prep but the majority are in classes from early on.

Several Asian cultures (Chinese, Indian) are heavily focused on education, particularly STEM. Kids have tutors and are often working 2-3 years ahead in math. Of course that's reflected in the test scores. Not necessarily a bad thing. Those families devote lots of resources to education and sometimes music lessons from a young age, and those kids do very well as a result. Why is it their problem so many white families put their resources toward athletics instead? Support starts at home.

What about families that can’t afford prep classes? Do you just assume their kids lack ability?

Most of the families I know who pay for tutoring are middle class not affluent, but are willing to make sacrifices of time and money for their kids' education. How do we help kids from lower socioeconomic strata? Early interventions, the only way. Identify bright FARMS kids *early* and give provide extra academic support for them. If you're modifying the system to admit kids who may not be able to keep up with those who are, practically speaking, privileged with a years-long head start, it's not really helping them in a meaningful way. The only reasonable path is to level the playing field very early and commit to ongoing support for those bright kids who lack material advantages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A coworker told me that no one gets in without prep. Well my kid did. From his circle of Blair friends, there was one child who was prepped. While there are families who prep, I also think people use that idea to justify why their kid did not get in. In reality it is like very competitive colleges. Lots of very talented kids just don't get in.

I don't think it is appropriate to use the cohort method for HS students since in HS there are many levels of classes available. In middle school there is much less differentiation (or none).

Maybe 25%-30% manage without prep but the majority are in classes from early on.

Several Asian cultures (Chinese, Indian) are heavily focused on education, particularly STEM. Kids have tutors and are often working 2-3 years ahead in math. Of course that's reflected in the test scores. Not necessarily a bad thing. Those families devote lots of resources to education and sometimes music lessons from a young age, and those kids do very well as a result. Why is it their problem so many white families put their resources toward athletics instead? Support starts at home.

What about families that can’t afford prep classes? Do you just assume their kids lack ability?

Most of the families I know who pay for tutoring are middle class not affluent, but are willing to make sacrifices of time and money for their kids' education. How do we help kids from lower socioeconomic strata? Early interventions, the only way. Identify bright FARMS kids *early* and give provide extra academic support for them. If you're modifying the system to admit kids who may not be able to keep up with those who are, practically speaking, privileged with a years-long head start, it's not really helping them in a meaningful way. The only reasonable path is to level the playing field very early and commit to ongoing support for those bright kids who lack material advantages.

No-one is saying a kid scoring in the 85% isn't bright but can that child keep up with a kid scoring not just 99% in their grade but 99% several grades ahead? Those two children are in very different places. We don't know how much is tied to academic ability, but we do know the academic preparation and ability to jump into a very challenging magnet curriculum are not the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A coworker told me that no one gets in without prep. Well my kid did. From his circle of Blair friends, there was one child who was prepped. While there are families who prep, I also think people use that idea to justify why their kid did not get in. In reality it is like very competitive colleges. Lots of very talented kids just don't get in.

I don't think it is appropriate to use the cohort method for HS students since in HS there are many levels of classes available. In middle school there is much less differentiation (or none).

Maybe 25%-30% manage without prep but the majority are in classes from early on.

Several Asian cultures (Chinese, Indian) are heavily focused on education, particularly STEM. Kids have tutors and are often working 2-3 years ahead in math. Of course that's reflected in the test scores. Not necessarily a bad thing. Those families devote lots of resources to education and sometimes music lessons from a young age, and those kids do very well as a result. Why is it their problem so many white families put their resources toward athletics instead? Support starts at home.

What about families that can’t afford prep classes? Do you just assume their kids lack ability?

Most of the families I know who pay for tutoring are middle class not affluent, but are willing to make sacrifices of time and money for their kids' education. How do we help kids from lower socioeconomic strata? Early interventions, the only way. Identify bright FARMS kids *early* and give provide extra academic support for them. If you're modifying the system to admit kids who may not be able to keep up with those who are, practically speaking, privileged with a years-long head start, it's not really helping them in a meaningful way. The only reasonable path is to level the playing field very early and commit to ongoing support for those bright kids who lack material advantages.

You think early interventions level the playing field with students whose parents are able to afford prep classes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My RMIB kid did not prep either. He's always been a 99 percentile test taker.

Mine did! They started in 3rd grade 2 hours a day 5 days a week, but no way they would've been admitted without it.

And that's fine too. I don't see why people try to make prep-families feel guilty about helping their kids get in. We did and, looking at how it helped our kids in HS, college, and after college, we would do it again! Yes, they are older.

Prep is perfectly fine but shouldn't be required to access enriched opportunities from publicly funded programs. When the majority of those being accepted were enrolled in outside prep, it's time to rethink our admission process so that all students have a shot at these opportunities, not just those families that can spend the $$$ to purchase a seat.

Game seems always unfair when you can't win. What a cynical view.

And some people will say anything to maintain their privilege that gives them a big leg up on everyone else.

Yes, some of us worked hard to make sure we can provide for our kids. What's wrong with that? Isn't that your job as a parent? Your inability to provide is no one's fault except you.

You are absolutely blind to both the systemic barriers and person tragedies many people face. My parents had to deal with segregated education and then my mom almost died from cancer. They weren’t lazy or stupid or uncaring, but they could not provide better for me than they did. I graduated college with a huge debt which has affected housing choices I had to make my family. And here, housing affects what schools you can access.

Listen, I am not even sure why you are picking a fight with me. You do what you have to do to best support your kids. I came to this county when I was 15 with $125 in my pocket. I was looked down at, cursed at, spited at... So don't tell me about the systematic barriers... I've experienced it, seen it, and had to live thru it. But, at the end of the day, you still got to keep pushing forward. Looking back won't help you. Anyway, I am not even sure why we are talking about this. Good day.

In other words, you have nothing to say about thinking people don’t work hard just because they aren’t where you are.

[Anonymous]

Yes, some of us worked hard to make sure we can provide for our kids. What's wrong with that? Isn't that your job as a parent? Your inability to provide is no one's fault except you.

Well, the problem is that a seat at a publicly funded magnet program is not a reward for good parenting, nor for your hard work. It is meant to provide opportunities for kids who would not have those opportunities at their home school (hence the 'magnet' part).

If you are a good parent, a good earner, good for you! But that's not what this is about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about all the families that just choose not to prep but spend tons of time and $$ on sports? Should they be excluded from varsity level play because they prepped?

Ooooooh- YES. Great idea! I hate how high school soccer, to take one example, is really only accessible to students whose parents have shelled out (time and money wise) for travel soccer.

Let’s blow it ALL wide open! Haha. Never going to happen. Nice to dream though

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, some of us worked hard to make sure we can provide for our kids. What's wrong with that? Isn't that your job as a parent? Your inability to provide is no one's fault except you.

Well, the problem is that a seat at a publicly funded magnet program is not a reward for good parenting, nor for your hard work. It is meant to provide opportunities for kids who would not have those opportunities at their home school (hence the 'magnet' part).

If you are a good parent, a good earner, good for you! But that's not what this is about.

How about the high reading and math groups? It is really not any different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A coworker told me that no one gets in without prep. Well my kid did. From his circle of Blair friends, there was one child who was prepped. While there are families who prep, I also think people use that idea to justify why their kid did not get in. In reality it is like very competitive colleges. Lots of very talented kids just don't get in.

I don't think it is appropriate to use the cohort method for HS students since in HS there are many levels of classes available. In middle school there is much less differentiation (or none).

Maybe 25%-30% manage without prep but the majority are in classes from early on.

Several Asian cultures (Chinese, Indian) are heavily focused on education, particularly STEM. Kids have tutors and are often working 2-3 years ahead in math. Of course that's reflected in the test scores. Not necessarily a bad thing. Those families devote lots of resources to education and sometimes music lessons from a young age, and those kids do very well as a result. Why is it their problem so many white families put their resources toward athletics instead? Support starts at home.

What about families that can’t afford prep classes? Do you just assume their kids lack ability?

Most of the families I know who pay for tutoring are middle class not affluent, but are willing to make sacrifices of time and money for their kids' education. How do we help kids from lower socioeconomic strata? Early interventions, the only way. Identify bright FARMS kids *early* and give provide extra academic support for them. If you're modifying the system to admit kids who may not be able to keep up with those who are, practically speaking, privileged with a years-long head start, it's not really helping them in a meaningful way. The only reasonable path is to level the playing field very early and commit to ongoing support for those bright kids who lack material advantages.

The ones I know are filthy rich and laugh that you can't keep up with their spending.