Did MCPS do a sneaky thing for the magnet lotteries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The best option would be to combine both. The Magnet program automatically admits, for example, all 98-99+ percentile children on a Merit basis; but also adds, say X slots on an 85th percentile "equity" basis.

I agree with this suggestion. I believe they are no longer able use race as a category (right? can someone more knowledgeable correct me if I'm wrong?), but I wonder why they can't do this with FARMS status.

If you are 85% and FARMS you're in. If you're non-FARMS, you need to be in 99+ percentile. Why can't they do that?

It's always been illegal to use race as a criterion. That's why the process is race blind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is depressing, and none of the kids are winning except the white ones.

Don't fret. There won't be any white kids in MCPS in 10 years.

Now THAT would be interesting. I actually worked in a charter school in the south where the white students hung out with each other, and the majority of students of color (Black, Indian) collectively self-segregated - thinking about it, I only knew of a handful of Hispanic or Asian students, but they hung out with white kids. In my 6 high school math classes, the Indian AND Black students outperformed my white students with ease, and I wholly attribute it to the fact that their parents worked with teachers instead of pulling the special snowflake bullshit. I didn't have any Hispanic students in my class and the one Asian student I had did terribly, I truly believe because she was trying to fit in with the white kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The best option would be to combine both. The Magnet program automatically admits, for example, all 98-99+ percentile children on a Merit basis; but also adds, say X slots on an 85th percentile "equity" basis.

I agree with this suggestion. I believe they are no longer able use race as a category (right? can someone more knowledgeable correct me if I'm wrong?), but I wonder why they can't do this with FARMS status.

If you are 85% and FARMS you're in. If you're non-FARMS, you need to be in 99+ percentile. Why can't they do that?

It's always been illegal to use race as a criterion. That's why the process is race blind.

Prior to the late 90s, race could be considered in requesting transfers to schools to take advantage of special programs. MCPS switched to FARMS as a proxy of race in response to these lawsuits in the late 90s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The best option would be to combine both. The Magnet program automatically admits, for example, all 98-99+ percentile children on a Merit basis; but also adds, say X slots on an 85th percentile "equity" basis.

I agree with this suggestion. I believe they are no longer able use race as a category (right? can someone more knowledgeable correct me if I'm wrong?), but I wonder why they can't do this with FARMS status.

If you are 85% and FARMS you're in. If you're non-FARMS, you need to be in 99+ percentile. Why can't they do that?

It's always been illegal to use race as a criterion. That's why the process is race blind.

Prior to the late 90s, race could be considered in requesting transfers to schools to take advantage of special programs. MCPS switched to FARMS as a proxy of race in response to these lawsuits in the late 90s.

I find that very hard to believe because it was illegal then too. Can you provide any evidence to support this or is this just more misinformation and propaganda?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is depressing, and none of the kids are winning except the white ones.

Don't fret. There won't be any white kids in MCPS in 10 years.

I love all these drama queen posts.

I used to work for a woman who's very involved in moco conservative politics and this was basically her lament. It was creepy and sad and I'm so glad I don't work for her anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The best option would be to combine both. The Magnet program automatically admits, for example, all 98-99+ percentile children on a Merit basis; but also adds, say X slots on an 85th percentile "equity" basis.

I agree with this suggestion. I believe they are no longer able use race as a category (right? can someone more knowledgeable correct me if I'm wrong?), but I wonder why they can't do this with FARMS status.

If you are 85% and FARMS you're in. If you're non-FARMS, you need to be in 99+ percentile. Why can't they do that?

It's always been illegal to use race as a criterion. That's why the process is race blind.

Prior to the late 90s, race could be considered in requesting transfers to schools to take advantage of special programs. MCPS switched to FARMS as a proxy of race in response to these lawsuits in the late 90s.

I find that very hard to believe because it was illegal then too. Can you provide any evidence to support this or is this just more misinformation and propaganda?

Actually, could you provide evidence of what you're saying? This seems to suggest otherwise:

https://www.nytimes.com/1998/11/20/us/affirmative-action-voided-at-public-school.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The best option would be to combine both. The Magnet program automatically admits, for example, all 98-99+ percentile children on a Merit basis; but also adds, say X slots on an 85th percentile "equity" basis.

I agree with this suggestion. I believe they are no longer able use race as a category (right? can someone more knowledgeable correct me if I'm wrong?), but I wonder why they can't do this with FARMS status.

If you are 85% and FARMS you're in. If you're non-FARMS, you need to be in 99+ percentile. Why can't they do that?

It's always been illegal to use race as a criterion. That's why the process is race blind.

Prior to the late 90s, race could be considered in requesting transfers to schools to take advantage of special programs. MCPS switched to FARMS as a proxy of race in response to these lawsuits in the late 90s.

I find that very hard to believe because it was illegal then too. Can you provide any evidence to support this or is this just more misinformation and propaganda?

Eisenberg v MCPS
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/2000-03/21/083r-032100-idx.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The best option would be to combine both. The Magnet program automatically admits, for example, all 98-99+ percentile children on a Merit basis; but also adds, say X slots on an 85th percentile "equity" basis.

I agree with this suggestion. I believe they are no longer able use race as a category (right? can someone more knowledgeable correct me if I'm wrong?), but I wonder why they can't do this with FARMS status.

If you are 85% and FARMS you're in. If you're non-FARMS, you need to be in 99+ percentile. Why can't they do that?

It's always been illegal to use race as a criterion. That's why the process is race blind.

Prior to the late 90s, race could be considered in requesting transfers to schools to take advantage of special programs. MCPS switched to FARMS as a proxy of race in response to these lawsuits in the late 90s.

Of course, I mean half the reason these special programs exist was to segregate the haves from the have nots. They were another workaround to hinder for desegregation efforts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is depressing, and none of the kids are winning except the white ones.

Don't fret. There won't be any white kids in MCPS in 10 years.

I love all these drama queen posts.

I used to work for a woman who's very involved in moco conservative politics and this was basically her lament. It was creepy and sad and I'm so glad I don't work for her anymore.

Partly why I think some of these posts are pure astroturf or the work of some wacky Q.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It looks like they greatly expanded the "considered" pool for the lottery in order to get their desired demographics. For the CESes they considered 11,446 students. Isn't that almost every child in that grade? The same goes for middle schools where the "considered" pool was almost double what it was in previous years. Does anyone have an explanation for how this happened and why this was done in such secrecy?

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/schoolchoice/210818%20CES%20Secondary%20App%20Prog%20Admission%20Results.pdf

I heard they're lowering the cutoff to 80% this year! They're so sneaky!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It looks like they greatly expanded the "considered" pool for the lottery in order to get their desired demographics. For the CESes they considered 11,446 students. Isn't that almost every child in that grade? The same goes for middle schools where the "considered" pool was almost double what it was in previous years. Does anyone have an explanation for how this happened and why this was done in such secrecy?

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/schoolchoice/210818%20CES%20Secondary%20App%20Prog%20Admission%20Results.pdf

OMG OMG they're so so sneaky!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like they greatly expanded the "considered" pool for the lottery in order to get their desired demographics. For the CESes they considered 11,446 students. Isn't that almost every child in that grade? The same goes for middle schools where the "considered" pool was almost double what it was in previous years. Does anyone have an explanation for how this happened and why this was done in such secrecy?

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/schoolchoice/210818%20CES%20Secondary%20App%20Prog%20Admission%20Results.pdf

I heard they're lowering the cutoff to 80% this year! They're so sneaky!

The actual rumor is they're lowering it by 5% per year and this is just the beginning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is depressing, and none of the kids are winning except the white ones.

Don't fret. There won't be any white kids in MCPS in 10 years.

Now THAT would be interesting. I actually worked in a charter school in the south where the white students hung out with each other, and the majority of students of color (Black, Indian) collectively self-segregated - thinking about it, I only knew of a handful of Hispanic or Asian students, but they hung out with white kids. In my 6 high school math classes, the Indian AND Black students outperformed my white students with ease, and I wholly attribute it to the fact that their parents worked with teachers instead of pulling the special snowflake bullshit. I didn't have any Hispanic students in my class and the one Asian student I had did terribly, I truly believe because she was trying to fit in with the white kids.

You seem... well-intentioned? And yeah, semantics, but interesting you wrote white students "hung out together" and Black and Indian students "self-segregated." Reminded of the Katrina "looters vs finders."

Also, are you British? Indian students, assuming you mean Asian Indian/South Asian, are... well, they're Asian. Yes, yes, you meant "East Asian," or maybe "East and Southeast Asian."

AND Black students? Not just the Indian ones? :/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like they greatly expanded the "considered" pool for the lottery in order to get their desired demographics. For the CESes they considered 11,446 students. Isn't that almost every child in that grade? The same goes for middle schools where the "considered" pool was almost double what it was in previous years. Does anyone have an explanation for how this happened and why this was done in such secrecy?

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/schoolchoice/210818%20CES%20Secondary%20App%20Prog%20Admission%20Results.pdf

I heard they're lowering the cutoff to 80% this year! They're so sneaky!

The actual rumor is they're lowering it by 5% per year and this is just the beginning.

no the ACTUAL rumor is mrs krabappel and principal skinner were in the closet making babies and I saw one of the babies and the baby looked at me

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like they greatly expanded the "considered" pool for the lottery in order to get their desired demographics. For the CESes they considered 11,446 students. Isn't that almost every child in that grade? The same goes for middle schools where the "considered" pool was almost double what it was in previous years. Does anyone have an explanation for how this happened and why this was done in such secrecy?

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/schoolchoice/210818%20CES%20Secondary%20App%20Prog%20Admission%20Results.pdf

I heard they're lowering the cutoff to 80% this year! They're so sneaky!

The actual rumor is they're lowering it by 5% per year and this is just the beginning.

They released this year's FAQ, and cutoff is not specified:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1in8H2GM2fA-V3knp5ijlWT2mcbxdvbs9Ul9NCA1HgwE/edit

Last year's FAQ clearly specifies 85% cutoff:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l0Zy-bCfG7O8E-F64VOnit_54fjOIU_lTR1JyU8SSMg/edit
"a locally normed minimum of 85th percentile"

Sneaky is the right word describing MCPS.