5th Grade CogAT : Number Correct

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:99%, V53, Q43, N49. In boundary for TPMS, currently in a CES and not accepted at either TPMS or Eastern. At least the kid learned how to write in the CES.

If MCPS did a better job for all kids, people might not be losing their minds over envelopes. The County goes through the process of identifying kids as gifted at multiple points (and I think they're a little too generous with that label), but then has limited ability to actually provide enrichment. 100 spots for STEM enrichment is a joke. All kids could benefit from enriched science classes, not just the 99.9% who won this bizarre mcps lottery.

Those scores are high! It's hard to believe they aren't high enough to get a spot, or at least waitlisted!

If those scores are accurate something else is going on. My kid got spots at both magnets with lower scores, also in bound for TPMS. MCPS says it’s not any one factor so I’d guess there are differences in:

- MAP scores
- grades
- age (PP’s kid is likely red shirted or one of the older kids)

Immediate PP is your child at a CES?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:99%, V53, Q43, N49. In boundary for TPMS, currently in a CES and not accepted at either TPMS or Eastern. At least the kid learned how to write in the CES.

If MCPS did a better job for all kids, people might not be losing their minds over envelopes. The County goes through the process of identifying kids as gifted at multiple points (and I think they're a little too generous with that label), but then has limited ability to actually provide enrichment. 100 spots for STEM enrichment is a joke. All kids could benefit from enriched science classes, not just the 99.9% who won this bizarre mcps lottery.

Those scores are high! It's hard to believe they aren't high enough to get a spot, or at least waitlisted!

That's a very good verbal but low quant for TPMS from our knowledge which admittedly is not for inbounds so it may or may not apply to your case. The kids who got in from our school only got 1-2 wrong in that section.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:99%, V53, Q43, N49. In boundary for TPMS, currently in a CES and not accepted at either TPMS or Eastern. At least the kid learned how to write in the CES.

If MCPS did a better job for all kids, people might not be losing their minds over envelopes. The County goes through the process of identifying kids as gifted at multiple points (and I think they're a little too generous with that label), but then has limited ability to actually provide enrichment. 100 spots for STEM enrichment is a joke. All kids could benefit from enriched science classes, not just the 99.9% who won this bizarre mcps lottery.

Those scores are high! It's hard to believe they aren't high enough to get a spot, or at least waitlisted!

If those scores are accurate something else is going on. My kid got spots at both magnets with lower scores, also in bound for TPMS. MCPS says it’s not any one factor so I’d guess there are differences in:

- MAP scores
- grades
- age (PP’s kid is likely red shirted or one of the older kids)

You think?
My child got a spot in one of the magnets and is rejected by another (we're not in-bound for anything and not in a CES), and DC's scores are higher than PP's child's in V and Q and 1 point lower in NV.
They definitely compare children with other kids in their 'designated' cohort, not just with the rest of MCPS 5th graders. But I do agree, it's a completely bizarre system that doesn't make any sense. I was positive that my 99%-scoring child would get into a CES, and she didn't. Then I thought there's no way she'd get into a MS magnet if she was rejected for a CES, but then she got accepted. Go figure. But it truly is a shame that academically advanced children are not offered proper enrichment in their home school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:99%, V53, Q43, N49. In boundary for TPMS, currently in a CES and not accepted at either TPMS or Eastern. At least the kid learned how to write in the CES.

If MCPS did a better job for all kids, people might not be losing their minds over envelopes. The County goes through the process of identifying kids as gifted at multiple points (and I think they're a little too generous with that label), but then has limited ability to actually provide enrichment. 100 spots for STEM enrichment is a joke. All kids could benefit from enriched science classes, not just the 99.9% who won this bizarre mcps lottery.

Those scores are high! It's hard to believe they aren't high enough to get a spot, or at least waitlisted!

If those scores are accurate something else is going on. My kid got spots at both magnets with lower scores, also in bound for TPMS. MCPS says it’s not any one factor so I’d guess there are differences in:

- MAP scores
- grades
- age (PP’s kid is likely red shirted or one of the older kids)

Wait. So you're on an anonymous board talking to someone else on an anonymous board and you happen to know that you're both at the same elementary school?

Yes, because of the info provided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:99%, V53, Q43, N49. In boundary for TPMS, currently in a CES and not accepted at either TPMS or Eastern. At least the kid learned how to write in the CES.

If MCPS did a better job for all kids, people might not be losing their minds over envelopes. The County goes through the process of identifying kids as gifted at multiple points (and I think they're a little too generous with that label), but then has limited ability to actually provide enrichment. 100 spots for STEM enrichment is a joke. All kids could benefit from enriched science classes, not just the 99.9% who won this bizarre mcps lottery.

Those scores are high! It's hard to believe they aren't high enough to get a spot, or at least waitlisted!

If those scores are accurate something else is going on. My kid got spots at both magnets with lower scores, also in bound for TPMS. MCPS says it’s not any one factor so I’d guess there are differences in:

- MAP scores
- grades
- age (PP’s kid is likely red shirted or one of the older kids)

Wait. So you're on an anonymous board talking to someone else on an anonymous board and you happen to know that you're both at the same elementary school?

Yes, because of the info provided.

I am neither of these posters but find this response befuddling. It is true that there are only two elementary schools that feed into that school, but a person could be in bounds for TPMS and be at one of several CES programs. They could be at Piney Branch in a local program, Oak View in a regional program, or another program because they had a COSA a at the time of testing.

[Anonymous]

I do think there was a significant disadvantage coming from a CES, based on the scores people are posting above. My CES kid got a 58V and 44Q and was not even wait-listed at either school. (The NV was not great, but my understanding is that NV is poorly correlated with success in these types of programs, so not looked at as much.)
Oh well. You win some, you lose some, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do think there was a significant disadvantage coming from a CES, based on the scores people are posting above. My CES kid got a 58V and 44Q and was not even wait-listed at either school. (The NV was not great, but my understanding is that NV is poorly correlated with success in these types of programs, so not looked at as much.)
Oh well. You win some, you lose some, I guess.

I was thinking the NV must count as math, because my DC was admitted to both with almost the same scores as your DC - 58V, 45Q - but was 98th percentile MCPS for NV. DC also had good MAP and PARCC scores, but I’m assuming other kids did, too. DC is not in CES but attends a school that houses a regional center.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think there was a significant disadvantage coming from a CES, based on the scores people are posting above. My CES kid got a 58V and 44Q and was not even wait-listed at either school. (The NV was not great, but my understanding is that NV is poorly correlated with success in these types of programs, so not looked at as much.)
Oh well. You win some, you lose some, I guess.

I was thinking the NV must count as math, because my DC was admitted to both with almost the same scores as your DC - 58V, 45Q - but was 98th percentile MCPS for NV. DC also had good MAP and PARCC scores, but I’m assuming other kids did, too. DC is not in CES but attends a school that houses a regional center.

I assume the composite score is more important. Doesn’t matter that V and Q are good, NV was not high enough. NV is the hardest and most likely to show ability rather than prepping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do think there was a significant disadvantage coming from a CES, based on the scores people are posting above. My CES kid got a 58V and 44Q and was not even wait-listed at either school. (The NV was not great, but my understanding is that NV is poorly correlated with success in these types of programs, so not looked at as much.)
Oh well. You win some, you lose some, I guess.

I don't think the problem is your child came from a CES. From DD talking with friends (some of her friends share way too much) it looks more like they were looking for consistent ability across all the three sections. Just guessing but I think it's because the competition was just really strong rather than the admissions committee wanting a more well-rounded child in terms of test scores although that could be it too. So your child's 58V, which is just incredible and a real outlier, was looked at more holistically with the okay quant and as you said lower NV.

I don't think it's true what you're saying about them not looking at NV.Wouldn't be surprised if MCPS put an equal emphasis on it because it's traditionally considered to be more fair to ESOL students because it doesn't require language skills and more fair to FARMS because it's difficult to prep for these questions. If you look at the scores posted on this board most of those getting in posted high NV scores too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:99%, V53, Q43, N49. In boundary for TPMS, currently in a CES and not accepted at either TPMS or Eastern. At least the kid learned how to write in the CES.

If MCPS did a better job for all kids, people might not be losing their minds over envelopes. The County goes through the process of identifying kids as gifted at multiple points (and I think they're a little too generous with that label), but then has limited ability to actually provide enrichment. 100 spots for STEM enrichment is a joke. All kids could benefit from enriched science classes, not just the 99.9% who won this bizarre mcps lottery.

Those scores are high! It's hard to believe they aren't high enough to get a spot, or at least waitlisted!

If those scores are accurate something else is going on. My kid got spots at both magnets with lower scores, also in bound for TPMS. MCPS says it’s not any one factor so I’d guess there are differences in:

- MAP scores
- grades
- age (PP’s kid is likely red shirted or one of the older kids)

Wait. So you're on an anonymous board talking to someone else on an anonymous board and you happen to know that you're both at the same elementary school?

Yes, because of the info provided.

If you're actually at the same school I would bet your child is a boy and the other PP's child is a girl or vice versa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:99%, V53, Q43, N49. In boundary for TPMS, currently in a CES and not accepted at either TPMS or Eastern. At least the kid learned how to write in the CES.

If MCPS did a better job for all kids, people might not be losing their minds over envelopes. The County goes through the process of identifying kids as gifted at multiple points (and I think they're a little too generous with that label), but then has limited ability to actually provide enrichment. 100 spots for STEM enrichment is a joke. All kids could benefit from enriched science classes, not just the 99.9% who won this bizarre mcps lottery.

Those scores are high! It's hard to believe they aren't high enough to get a spot, or at least waitlisted!

If those scores are accurate something else is going on. My kid got spots at both magnets with lower scores, also in bound for TPMS. MCPS says it’s not any one factor so I’d guess there are differences in:

- MAP scores
- grades
- age (PP’s kid is likely red shirted or one of the older kids)

Wait. So you're on an anonymous board talking to someone else on an anonymous board and you happen to know that you're both at the same elementary school?

Yes, because of the info provided.

If you're actually at the same school I would bet your child is a boy and the other PP's child is a girl or vice versa.

Possibly but my child (lower scores than the PP) is a boy. So only if your conclusion is that boys can get in to TPMS with lower scores than girls does that makes sense. More likely the kid is red shirted and his/her scores/grades aren’t consistent.

[Anonymous]

I is not hard for the committee to know which child is from a CES and which is not. The report cards are different. Kids from a CES have their Reading & Writing marked with an "ESP" in 4th grade, and Reading/Writing/Science/Social Studies marked with "ESP" in 5th. I have multiple kids who have or have not gone through the program. Of course we don't know of every kids' scores but we know enough of those admitted into the MS magnets and those who did not, including my own. There is NO DOUBT in my mind that MCPS tries to balance gender. If you're a boy, you get a leg up in your admission to Eastern and if you're a girl, you get a boost into Takoma. Also, MCPS also tries to balance the admission from the CES and non-CES kids into the middle school magnets. We have seem multiple scores (across the board with PARCC, Grades, MAP, CoGat) higher by kids who is from the CES but did not get admitted but a slightly lower score by a kid at a non-CES (even at a W home ES) get admission. So gender and CES status absolutely play into the admission equation.

There are too many sharp kids in this area, and MCPS really needs to consider opening these types of programs up. Truly open it up and not just throw out the name without proper support. The ridiculous MS enriched classes are not really enriched as at our home school, they let practically all the kids in it. When you have 100% of the 6th graders in the "magnet social studies", it frankly cannot be enriched the same way.

[Anonymous]

A kid who has had a leg up in the CES for two years SHOULD score higher than a kid who has not because of all the extra instruction. For a non-CES kid to score high despite the lack luster regular teaching it shows innate ability so it’s absolutely reasonable if they can get in with slightly lower scores if that’s what is happening.

However what is more likely is that schools that house a CES have a larger number off highly able kids than those that don’t. If your school has a CES then your kid has more competition regardless of whether your kid is in the CES or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I is not hard for the committee to know which child is from a CES and which is not. The report cards are different. Kids from a CES have their Reading & Writing marked with an "ESP" in 4th grade, and Reading/Writing/Science/Social Studies marked with "ESP" in 5th. I have multiple kids who have or have not gone through the program. Of course we don't know of every kids' scores but we know enough of those admitted into the MS magnets and those who did not, including my own. There is NO DOUBT in my mind that MCPS tries to balance gender. If you're a boy, you get a leg up in your admission to Eastern and if you're a girl, you get a boost into Takoma. Also, MCPS also tries to balance the admission from the CES and non-CES kids into the middle school magnets. We have seem multiple scores (across the board with PARCC, Grades, MAP, CoGat) higher by kids who is from the CES but did not get admitted but a slightly lower score by a kid at a non-CES (even at a W home ES) get admission. So gender and CES status absolutely play into the admission equation.

There are too many sharp kids in this area, and MCPS really needs to consider opening these types of programs up. Truly open it up and not just throw out the name without proper support. The ridiculous MS enriched classes are not really enriched as at our home school, they let practically all the kids in it. When you have 100% of the 6th graders in the "magnet social studies", it frankly cannot be enriched the same way.

So if you kid is a girl in a CES but got into Takoma, is it a wash?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A kid who has had a leg up in the CES for two years SHOULD score higher than a kid who has not because of all the extra instruction. For a non-CES kid to score high despite the lack luster regular teaching it shows innate ability so it’s absolutely reasonable if they can get in with slightly lower scores if that’s what is happening.

However what is more likely is that schools that house a CES have a larger number off highly able kids than those that don’t. If your school has a CES then your kid has more competition regardless of whether your kid is in the CES or not.

So if you think writing a bit more or doing some internet research before writing an essay at CES magically improves COGAT scores, you are delusional. If CES students are indeed penalized as some people claim here, I think it would be highly unfair and may even be subject to lawsuit.