MAP-R score dipped

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here- thanks for reassuring responses. If its common for the scores to go up and down then its unfair for MCPS to use these scores for CES and magnet school qualification criteria. And I know that thats’ what they use for CES and they use the specific Fall(middle school magnet) or Winter (CES) test scores.

Okay, but they also have a cut off of 85th percentile for inclusion in the lottery. If a kid was so borderline that a slight drop in the fall of 5th grade put them under the cutoff for the 85th percentile, they might not have been a good fit for the middle school magnet to begin with.

Exposure-based tests like MAP are not great indicators of ability, interest and need to stretch that are supposed to be the focus of the magnets. They are also rather gameable by families with means seeking to increase their relative liklihood of selection over those without.

Besides, magnet-type education would be of benefit to a cohort far broader than that represented by the tippy-top, especially when making that evaluation at a single point in time.

I think we all agree that there are more kids who would benefit from magnet classes than there are spots, and I think parents (particularly of younger kids) should be advocating for localization of the magnet curriculum with cohorts inside the home school. But if we assume that number isn't increasing immediately, MCPS needs to find some way to pick kids and there is no perfect system.

But there clearly are better systems/algorithms, even just using what they have in hand. Saying there's no perfect system is like asking people to just give up on change for the better. Not sure that's the right approach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here- thanks for reassuring responses. If its common for the scores to go up and down then its unfair for MCPS to use these scores for CES and magnet school qualification criteria. And I know that thats’ what they use for CES and they use the specific Fall(middle school magnet) or Winter (CES) test scores.

Okay, but they also have a cut off of 85th percentile for inclusion in the lottery. If a kid was so borderline that a slight drop in the fall of 5th grade put them under the cutoff for the 85th percentile, they might not have been a good fit for the middle school magnet to begin with.

Exposure-based tests like MAP are not great indicators of ability, interest and need to stretch that are supposed to be the focus of the magnets. They are also rather gameable by families with means seeking to increase their relative liklihood of selection over those without.

Besides, magnet-type education would be of benefit to a cohort far broader than that represented by the tippy-top, especially when making that evaluation at a single point in time.

I know! I liked the CogAT better because only really wealthy families can afford the elite tutoring that it requires.

More tripe from you. Are you also the "only available at wealthy W feeders" poster? You spray these little disingenuous comments in the same way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I told my kid to bomb the fall test so her growth scores were better. Parent like me.

That's so smart. I should've told my kid to do this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here- thanks for reassuring responses. If its common for the scores to go up and down then its unfair for MCPS to use these scores for CES and magnet school qualification criteria. And I know that thats’ what they use for CES and they use the specific Fall(middle school magnet) or Winter (CES) test scores.

Okay, but they also have a cut off of 85th percentile for inclusion in the lottery. If a kid was so borderline that a slight drop in the fall of 5th grade put them under the cutoff for the 85th percentile, they might not have been a good fit for the middle school magnet to begin with.

Exposure-based tests like MAP are not great indicators of ability, interest and need to stretch that are supposed to be the focus of the magnets. They are also rather gameable by families with means seeking to increase their relative liklihood of selection over those without.

Besides, magnet-type education would be of benefit to a cohort far broader than that represented by the tippy-top, especially when making that evaluation at a single point in time.

I know! I liked the CogAT better because only really wealthy families can afford the elite tutoring that it requires.

More tripe from you. Are you also the "only available at wealthy W feeders" poster? You spray these little disingenuous comments in the same way.

DP. What she’s saying is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I told my kid to bomb the fall test so her growth scores were better. Parent like me.

That's so smart. I should've told my kid to do this.

What do they use growth score for? My kid is high on MAP growth chart, and there is no growth goals setup for him. I see 71% growth above mean because he does not make much growth. He competes with himself.