Did the Takoma MS magnet got MORE white this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
.. at the expense of others based on where they live. It's not about "hoarding". It's about equitable access, which this new method does not provide in the case of "peer cohort". If they did away with the cohort nonsense, the whole thread would go away.

I am pretty sure that it's ironic for parents who live in Bethesda and Potomac to complain about inequitable access in the context of MCPS, but my intuitive understanding of irony has been messed up since 1995 (damn you, Alanis Morissette).

it is inequitable access to a magnet program that the district provides supposedly to everyone, but they ding you if you have a peer cohort at your home school. That's not equitable access.

If you are referring to the fact that those rich kids in Bethesda and Potomac have more access to enrichment both in and outside of school, that's not enrichment provided by the school district. If it were, then it would be inequitable.

I am referring to the fact that kids who don't live in Bethesda and Potomac don't have access to the "good schools" in Bethesda and Potomac. Which was a feature, not a bug, for many parents in Bethesda and Potomac -- until MCPS started more explicitly considering home-school peer cohort for the magnet admissions process this year.

Tell you what. First we'll get rid of zoning by geographic location. Any kid can go to any school in the county. Or maybe kids can be assigned to schools by lottery. Then we'll remove the home-school peer-cohort part of the magnet admissions process. Sound good to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MCPS might as well just follow the AAP model in FCPS. That would be better than what we have now with the cohort nonsense.

- keep magnet programs for the highest achievers
- have local programs for high achievers in their local schools

agree. gets rid of the silly 60-90 minute bus rides to that is also an insult.

MCPS needs to see the poor results of Chapter 220 bussing kids all around for $millions and 20+ years. No impact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:American public schools are not like the schools some people here experienced in their home countries. Unfortunately this magnet cycle may have been a rude awakening. The mission of the US Department of Education is this: "ED's mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access." Note the "and ensuring equal access" part, which had to be a goal because this country has a very long history of restricting access to education by race and class. The mission is not to reward the top test-takers or to winnow out the best students for the purpose of plum jobs or college spots, like it may be in some countries. I feel as if we are speaking a different language from one another here.

This should be a pinned post. Someone in one of these threads posted about how magnet admissions should be more like uni admissions in Russia or India. Which...leaving aside the issues of corruption in those systems, and leaving aside that we are talking about 8 year-olds, not 18 year-olds, that's not how America works. Social mobility is a core national ideal, and you cannot square that with a system that tracks kids from kindergarten onward and then subjects them to high-stakes testing at 16 that determines their college major and life trajectory.

MSers are not 8 yrs olds (I believe this thread is about MS magnet).

Equitable access means -- it doesn't matter where you live, too.

I thought merit was also an American value.

If MCPS doesn't care about test scores then why are they trying to close the achievement gap and publish test score stats?

MSer are closer to 8-year-olds than 18-year-olds. At this level potential is more important than merit. Potential is a need that a school system can meet. Merit is someone who is already thriving where they are, whether that is because their home school is exceptional or they are doing something outside of school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
.. at the expense of others based on where they live. It's not about "hoarding". It's about equitable access, which this new method does not provide in the case of "peer cohort". If they did away with the cohort nonsense, the whole thread would go away.

I am pretty sure that it's ironic for parents who live in Bethesda and Potomac to complain about inequitable access in the context of MCPS, but my intuitive understanding of irony has been messed up since 1995 (damn you, Alanis Morissette).

it is inequitable access to a magnet program that the district provides supposedly to everyone, but they ding you if you have a peer cohort at your home school. That's not equitable access.

If you are referring to the fact that those rich kids in Bethesda and Potomac have more access to enrichment both in and outside of school, that's not enrichment provided by the school district. If it were, then it would be inequitable.

I am referring to the fact that kids who don't live in Bethesda and Potomac don't have access to the "good schools" in Bethesda and Potomac. Which was a feature, not a bug, for many parents in Bethesda and Potomac -- until MCPS started more explicitly considering home-school peer cohort for the magnet admissions process this year.

Tell you what. First we'll get rid of zoning by geographic location. Any kid can go to any school in the county. Or maybe kids can be assigned to schools by lottery. Then we'll remove the home-school peer-cohort part of the magnet admissions process. Sound good to you?

I have heard MCPS say that all MCPS schools are "good schools", so they can't have it both ways. Those non W schools are just as good as W schools, according to MCPS.

If you want to get rid of zoning and busing along with it, I'm all for it but that would hurt lower income kids more than upper income kids. You can't keep the transportation because that would cost way too much, and that would budget impact would hurt lower income kids more than upper income kids.

I think that underenrolled schools should allow cosas automatically on a first come first served basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
.. at the expense of others based on where they live. It's not about "hoarding". It's about equitable access, which this new method does not provide in the case of "peer cohort". If they did away with the cohort nonsense, the whole thread would go away.

I am pretty sure that it's ironic for parents who live in Bethesda and Potomac to complain about inequitable access in the context of MCPS, but my intuitive understanding of irony has been messed up since 1995 (damn you, Alanis Morissette).

it is inequitable access to a magnet program that the district provides supposedly to everyone, but they ding you if you have a peer cohort at your home school. That's not equitable access.

If you are referring to the fact that those rich kids in Bethesda and Potomac have more access to enrichment both in and outside of school, that's not enrichment provided by the school district. If it were, then it would be inequitable.

I am referring to the fact that kids who don't live in Bethesda and Potomac don't have access to the "good schools" in Bethesda and Potomac. Which was a feature, not a bug, for many parents in Bethesda and Potomac -- until MCPS started more explicitly considering home-school peer cohort for the magnet admissions process this year.

Tell you what. First we'll get rid of zoning by geographic location. Any kid can go to any school in the county. Or maybe kids can be assigned to schools by lottery. Then we'll remove the home-school peer-cohort part of the magnet admissions process. Sound good to you?

I have heard MCPS say that all MCPS schools are "good schools", so they can't have it both ways. Those non W schools are just as good as W schools, according to MCPS.

If you want to get rid of zoning and busing along with it, I'm all for it but that would hurt lower income kids more than upper income kids. You can't keep the transportation because that would cost way too much, and that would budget impact would hurt lower income kids more than upper income kids.

I think that underenrolled schools should allow cosas automatically on a first come first served basis.

I'm interpreting that as a no. You want to maintain segregated schools in MCPS -- but you don't want MCPS to make magnet admissions decisions based on the existence of segregated schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:American public schools are not like the schools some people here experienced in their home countries. Unfortunately this magnet cycle may have been a rude awakening. The mission of the US Department of Education is this: "ED's mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access." Note the "and ensuring equal access" part, which had to be a goal because this country has a very long history of restricting access to education by race and class. The mission is not to reward the top test-takers or to winnow out the best students for the purpose of plum jobs or college spots, like it may be in some countries. I feel as if we are speaking a different language from one another here.

This should be a pinned post. Someone in one of these threads posted about how magnet admissions should be more like uni admissions in Russia or India. Which...leaving aside the issues of corruption in those systems, and leaving aside that we are talking about 8 year-olds, not 18 year-olds, that's not how America works. Social mobility is a core national ideal, and you cannot square that with a system that tracks kids from kindergarten onward and then subjects them to high-stakes testing at 16 that determines their college major and life trajectory.

MSers are not 8 yrs olds (I believe this thread is about MS magnet).

Equitable access means -- it doesn't matter where you live, too.

I thought merit was also an American value.

If MCPS doesn't care about test scores then why are they trying to close the achievement gap and publish test score stats?

MSer are closer to 8-year-olds than 18-year-olds. At this level potential is more important than merit. Potential is a need that a school system can meet. Merit is someone who is already thriving where they are, whether that is because their home school is exceptional or they are doing something outside of school.

I have never heard this as a definition of merit. Would dictionary are you using?

A public school should provide equitable admission criteria to a county wide test in program regardless of where you live in the county or who your neighbors are, just as it should do so regardless of your skin color.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
.. at the expense of others based on where they live. It's not about "hoarding". It's about equitable access, which this new method does not provide in the case of "peer cohort". If they did away with the cohort nonsense, the whole thread would go away.

I am pretty sure that it's ironic for parents who live in Bethesda and Potomac to complain about inequitable access in the context of MCPS, but my intuitive understanding of irony has been messed up since 1995 (damn you, Alanis Morissette).

it is inequitable access to a magnet program that the district provides supposedly to everyone, but they ding you if you have a peer cohort at your home school. That's not equitable access.

If you are referring to the fact that those rich kids in Bethesda and Potomac have more access to enrichment both in and outside of school, that's not enrichment provided by the school district. If it were, then it would be inequitable.

I am referring to the fact that kids who don't live in Bethesda and Potomac don't have access to the "good schools" in Bethesda and Potomac. Which was a feature, not a bug, for many parents in Bethesda and Potomac -- until MCPS started more explicitly considering home-school peer cohort for the magnet admissions process this year.

Tell you what. First we'll get rid of zoning by geographic location. Any kid can go to any school in the county. Or maybe kids can be assigned to schools by lottery. Then we'll remove the home-school peer-cohort part of the magnet admissions process. Sound good to you?

I have heard MCPS say that all MCPS schools are "good schools", so they can't have it both ways. Those non W schools are just as good as W schools, according to MCPS.

If you want to get rid of zoning and busing along with it, I'm all for it but that would hurt lower income kids more than upper income kids. You can't keep the transportation because that would cost way too much, and that would budget impact would hurt lower income kids more than upper income kids.

I think that underenrolled schools should allow cosas automatically on a first come first served basis.

I'm interpreting that as a no. You want to maintain segregated schools in MCPS -- but you don't want MCPS to make magnet admissions decisions based on the existence of segregated schools.

You have comprehension issues. That was a yes, but with a caveat that what you suggest (open lottery) would end up hurting low income kids more than upper income kids. Also, I don't live in a W cluster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
.. at the expense of others based on where they live. It's not about "hoarding". It's about equitable access, which this new method does not provide in the case of "peer cohort". If they did away with the cohort nonsense, the whole thread would go away.

I am pretty sure that it's ironic for parents who live in Bethesda and Potomac to complain about inequitable access in the context of MCPS, but my intuitive understanding of irony has been messed up since 1995 (damn you, Alanis Morissette).

it is inequitable access to a magnet program that the district provides supposedly to everyone, but they ding you if you have a peer cohort at your home school. That's not equitable access.

If you are referring to the fact that those rich kids in Bethesda and Potomac have more access to enrichment both in and outside of school, that's not enrichment provided by the school district. If it were, then it would be inequitable.

I am referring to the fact that kids who don't live in Bethesda and Potomac don't have access to the "good schools" in Bethesda and Potomac. Which was a feature, not a bug, for many parents in Bethesda and Potomac -- until MCPS started more explicitly considering home-school peer cohort for the magnet admissions process this year.

Tell you what. First we'll get rid of zoning by geographic location. Any kid can go to any school in the county. Or maybe kids can be assigned to schools by lottery. Then we'll remove the home-school peer-cohort part of the magnet admissions process. Sound good to you?

BINGO!@

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I have never heard this as a definition of merit. Would dictionary are you using?

A public school should provide equitable admission criteria to a county wide test in program regardless of where you live in the county or who your neighbors are, just as it should do so regardless of your skin color.

You just invented a new protected class - age, disability, race, sex, religion, national origin, who your neighbors are...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
.. at the expense of others based on where they live. It's not about "hoarding". It's about equitable access, which this new method does not provide in the case of "peer cohort". If they did away with the cohort nonsense, the whole thread would go away.

I am pretty sure that it's ironic for parents who live in Bethesda and Potomac to complain about inequitable access in the context of MCPS, but my intuitive understanding of irony has been messed up since 1995 (damn you, Alanis Morissette).

it is inequitable access to a magnet program that the district provides supposedly to everyone, but they ding you if you have a peer cohort at your home school. That's not equitable access.

If you are referring to the fact that those rich kids in Bethesda and Potomac have more access to enrichment both in and outside of school, that's not enrichment provided by the school district. If it were, then it would be inequitable.

I am referring to the fact that kids who don't live in Bethesda and Potomac don't have access to the "good schools" in Bethesda and Potomac. Which was a feature, not a bug, for many parents in Bethesda and Potomac -- until MCPS started more explicitly considering home-school peer cohort for the magnet admissions process this year.

Tell you what. First we'll get rid of zoning by geographic location. Any kid can go to any school in the county. Or maybe kids can be assigned to schools by lottery. Then we'll remove the home-school peer-cohort part of the magnet admissions process. Sound good to you?

I have heard MCPS say that all MCPS schools are "good schools", so they can't have it both ways. Those non W schools are just as good as W schools, according to MCPS.

If you want to get rid of zoning and busing along with it, I'm all for it but that would hurt lower income kids more than upper income kids. You can't keep the transportation because that would cost way too much, and that would budget impact would hurt lower income kids more than upper income kids.

I think that underenrolled schools should allow cosas automatically on a first come first served basis.

I'm interpreting that as a no. You want to maintain segregated schools in MCPS -- but you don't want MCPS to make magnet admissions decisions based on the existence of segregated schools.

So what of it? It's in my self-interest.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous
My God. I'm inclined to be sympathetic to disappointed parents, but this is just foot stamping nonsense at this point. This whole thread is a case study in hoarding opportunity and deep resentment at the idea that someone else might get a chance to reach their potential.

agree

[Anonymous]

I'm interpreting that as a no. You want to maintain segregated schools in MCPS -- but you don't want MCPS to make magnet admissions decisions based on the existence of segregated schools.

So what of it? It's in my self-interest.

Of course it is. But it is not MCPS's job to preserve your real estate values nor to lump all of the opportunities onto a small group of kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
BOTTOM LINE the top 2.5% of 4000 (2018 application pool) beats out the top 16% of 600 (2017 application pool)

BUT BUT 4000 kids selected to test because of high grades and test scores isn't the same as the 600 kids selected by their parents!!

This sums up the previous 20+ pages perfectly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm interpreting that as a no. You want to maintain segregated schools in MCPS -- but you don't want MCPS to make magnet admissions decisions based on the existence of segregated schools.

So what of it? It's in my self-interest.

Of course it is. But it is not MCPS's job to preserve your real estate values nor to lump all of the opportunities onto a small group of kids.

You're right, but I don't think they'll ever see it that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I have never heard this as a definition of merit. Would dictionary are you using?

A public school should provide equitable admission criteria to a county wide test in program regardless of where you live in the county or who your neighbors are, just as it should do so regardless of your skin color.

You just invented a new protected class - age, disability, race, sex, religion, national origin, who your neighbors are...

actually MCPS did. THe Where You Live Factor was the main determinant of many who got in.