What is the real reason MCPS uses Lottery for Middle School Magnet Program

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It's interesting that now MCPS is not publishing the exact "local norming" and "lottery" methodologies? Notice a pattern there?

It's not curious at all because anyone should be able to figure it out it's basic stuff and detailed on their website so I don't know what you're talking about.

I know it's easy, but it's an issue for those people who wouldn't understand anything anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's interesting that now MCPS is not publishing the exact "local norming" and "lottery" methodologies? Notice a pattern there?

It's not curious at all because anyone should be able to figure it out it's basic stuff and detailed on their website so I don't know what you're talking about.

I know it's easy, but it's an issue for those people who wouldn't understand anything anyway.

I would like to understand. Can you please post the link with the lottery details? I'd like to know what method is used (ex. a spreadsheet, a contractor, etc.).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's interesting that now MCPS is not publishing the exact "local norming" and "lottery" methodologies? Notice a pattern there?

It's not curious at all because anyone should be able to figure it out it's basic stuff and detailed on their website so I don't know what you're talking about.

I know it's easy, but it's an issue for those people who wouldn't understand anything anyway.

I would like to understand. Can you please post the link with the lottery details? I'd like to know what method is used (ex. a spreadsheet, a contractor, etc.).

Foolocracy is here. Lottery magnet. Oxymoron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS makes things clear as mud, to be sure.

Local norms for us mean that the percentile score is based on the population of same-grade sutdents in the system from schools with somewhat similar demographic characteristics (FARMS or ever-FARMS, language learners, etc.). For elementary, I think there may be 3 such tranches of schools, and I don't think it's cluster-based, though one might expect some similarities within a cluster that would see elementaries tend to fall into the same local norming tranche.

The basic idea is that a naturally GT kid from a high-FARMS/high-ELL area may not have the circumstances (presence of cohort, access to tutoring, etc.) at their school to facilitate exposure to material that would positively influence raw test scores in the same way that a GT kid from a low-FARMS/low-ELL area might. Presuming that the objective is to identify the innate ability (not the achievement level) when determining who might benefit most from magnet placement, local norming can make sense.

It can also be taken too far, if driven by another agenda. Making the specifics of MCPS's local norming practice public would go a long way towards silencing the critics -- as long as the specifics don't indicate that another agenda is in play.

+1 Transparency is critical so that we all understand what the goals are and what the process is. Unfortunately, some drags the race into the conversation and divert the whole thing to the point the discussion becomes unproductive

A lot of culture warriors on DCUM.

It's one or two paid astroturfers always stirring up trouble.

I'm becoming more and more certain that someone is paying money to keep this yarn spinning. It doesn't make sense otherwise. Must have something to do with the lawsuit(s). Here we are in the middle of a pandemic with some serious issues that trouble the entire school population. But an issue for a few hundred students (frankly a few dozen) is getting as much traffic as discussion around a pandemic that concern every single MCPS family. And this isn't even the first thread about middle school magnets!

This conversation IS IMPORTANT - but the fact that this thread gets this much traffic in this environment is odd

If you are tired, just step away from this thread to something else.

Yes this issue is important and is about the future generations.. By the way, pandemic or not, lit is important to have long term vision for the future and any time is a good time to discuss issues that impact many future generation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know what is the real reason MCPS BOE uses lottery for CES program?
Why can't it be the consistency of performance against benchmarks in elementary school? and/or likewise consistency of performance in middle school for highschool magnet program

Are they using Lottery for selection into sports and games teams as well instead of performance benchmarks? or is the lottery exclusive for academic programs?

Seriously, the lottery should be held in a public setting instead of a lottery selection shrouded in mystery. Applicant submits application. Receives a raffle ticket. You put your ticket in the bowl (or elect to let them put the ticket in the bowl for you). They shake it up and let some kids pick it. Easy Peasy and everyone knows it is fair.

Lottery exclusively applied for academics so that certain groups can be reduced. You know those kids who work too hard and whose immigrant parents care too much about education. Screw those uppities. You won't replace us.

Please clarify, who is replacing who? But really, they should do it so that if you qualify academically, you get a raffle ticket and the raffle is held in the open.

Their statements aren't factual. The lottery was done because of the pandemic after the makers of the CogAT stated their test could not be administered remotely. They're just making up crazy conspiracy theories for which there is 0 evidence because it supports their extreme political agenda.

Right, even if what you are saying is true, is COGAT is the only possible test? Really? Instead of spending millions of $ on consultants.MCPS could actually create a test where prep wouldn't even matter. what extreme political agenda is it please? The lottery defamation league agenda? I see one side in power making power and some people asking questions and resisting politically expedient lazy solutions.

The PP was correct. Most of this stuff is misinformation to rile up the uninformed. They didn't set out to make a lottery it was the consequence of circumstances beyond their control. A more valid question is now that they could adminster the cogAT why are they keeping it?

Isn't this discussion is about the lack of transparency in the process? I could find a lot of helpful information being shared by many DCUMs on this thread. Some are playing provocators and many just ignore them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we are committed to a system that has fewer seats in the magnet than deserving kids, then I like the lottery. And that is speaking as a parent whose kids were in the lottery pool but didn't get a seat in the magnet.

The old system relied too much on teacher recommendations and other soft measures, which advantage the kids who sit still and color in the lines and do all the pedagogical nonsense that teachers now use. Everyone who has had kids in MCPS knows that the kids selected for magnet programs under the old system are often not the most gifted or intellectually curious or needing of extra stimulation. Certainly they were not the ones who tested the highest. They were the kids who played along the best.

So at least the lottery acknowledges the essential randomness of selection and the calls attention to the fact that we have chosen as a community not to provide the resources.

Why not expand the program to include all deserving candidates? Don't you think this will help the future generations and achieve no child left behind goals?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's interesting that now MCPS is not publishing the exact "local norming" and "lottery" methodologies? Notice a pattern there?

It's not curious at all because anyone should be able to figure it out it's basic stuff and detailed on their website so I don't know what you're talking about.

I know it's easy, but it's an issue for those people who wouldn't understand anything anyway.

I would like to understand. Can you please post the link with the lottery details? I'd like to know what method is used (ex. a spreadsheet, a contractor, etc.).

Foolocracy is here. Lottery magnet. Oxymoron.

It is clear that you have nothing to contribute to the discussion. Can you do us a favor by not distracting the other interested DCUMs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's interesting that now MCPS is not publishing the exact "local norming" and "lottery" methodologies? Notice a pattern there?

It's not curious at all because anyone should be able to figure it out it's basic stuff and detailed on their website so I don't know what you're talking about.

I know it's easy, but it's an issue for those people who wouldn't understand anything anyway.

I would like to understand. Can you please post the link with the lottery details? I'd like to know what method is used (ex. a spreadsheet, a contractor, etc.).

Foolocracy is here. Lottery magnet. Oxymoron.

It is clear that you have nothing to contribute to the discussion. Can you do us a favor by not distracting the other interested DCUMs?

Their comment seemed on point to me. These people who keep asking for explanations of the most obvious details which everyone else understands has gotten old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's interesting that now MCPS is not publishing the exact "local norming" and "lottery" methodologies? Notice a pattern there?

It's not curious at all because anyone should be able to figure it out it's basic stuff and detailed on their website so I don't know what you're talking about.

I know it's easy, but it's an issue for those people who wouldn't understand anything anyway.

I would like to understand. Can you please post the link with the lottery details? I'd like to know what method is used (ex. a spreadsheet, a contractor, etc.).

Foolocracy is here. Lottery magnet. Oxymoron.

It is clear that you have nothing to contribute to the discussion. Can you do us a favor by not distracting the other interested DCUMs?

Their comment seemed on point to me. These people who keep asking for explanations of the most obvious details which everyone else understands has gotten old.

All I am saying is that it doesn't matter. Lottery magnet is no longer a magnet. It is an oxymoron. MCPS has been obfuscating for a while and will never tell you what local norming means. It is just something they can use to manipulate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's interesting that now MCPS is not publishing the exact "local norming" and "lottery" methodologies? Notice a pattern there?

It's not curious at all because anyone should be able to figure it out it's basic stuff and detailed on their website so I don't know what you're talking about.

I know it's easy, but it's an issue for those people who wouldn't understand anything anyway.

I would like to understand. Can you please post the link with the lottery details? I'd like to know what method is used (ex. a spreadsheet, a contractor, etc.).

Foolocracy is here. Lottery magnet. Oxymoron.

It is clear that you have nothing to contribute to the discussion. Can you do us a favor by not distracting the other interested DCUMs?

Their comment seemed on point to me. These people who keep asking for explanations of the most obvious details which everyone else understands has gotten old.

All I am saying is that it doesn't matter. Lottery magnet is no longer a magnet. It is an oxymoron. MCPS has been obfuscating for a while and will never tell you what local norming means. It is just something they can use to manipulate.

ox·y·mo·ron
/ˌäksəˈmôrˌän/
Learn to pronounce
noun
a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction (e.g. faith unfaithful kept him falsely true ).

Also lottery magnet. You can have a lottery or you can have a magnet program, not both.

[Anonymous]

Of course you can have both.

I need to find someone who can regularly dunk a basketball. Anyone that is at least 6ft5in and normal BMI will be able to do the work.

I only need one - and there is more than one candidate that fits the bill.

It doesn't matter to me which one I choose because all I need is for that ball to be dunked. A lottery suits me just fine because I win no matter who I choose.

It means a lot more to the candidate - especially if they have made life plans around dunking basketballs.

Do some of them dunk better than others? Absolutely. Does it matter to me? Not at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's interesting that now MCPS is not publishing the exact "local norming" and "lottery" methodologies? Notice a pattern there?

It's not curious at all because anyone should be able to figure it out it's basic stuff and detailed on their website so I don't know what you're talking about.

I know it's easy, but it's an issue for those people who wouldn't understand anything anyway.

I would like to understand. Can you please post the link with the lottery details? I'd like to know what method is used (ex. a spreadsheet, a contractor, etc.).

You don't care about any of this and just want an excuse to complain about your hatred for public education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's interesting that now MCPS is not publishing the exact "local norming" and "lottery" methodologies? Notice a pattern there?

It's not curious at all because anyone should be able to figure it out it's basic stuff and detailed on their website so I don't know what you're talking about.

I know it's easy, but it's an issue for those people who wouldn't understand anything anyway.

I would like to understand. Can you please post the link with the lottery details? I'd like to know what method is used (ex. a spreadsheet, a contractor, etc.).

Foolocracy is here. Lottery magnet. Oxymoron.

It is clear that you have nothing to contribute to the discussion. Can you do us a favor by not distracting the other interested DCUMs?

Their comment seemed on point to me. These people who keep asking for explanations of the most obvious details which everyone else understands has gotten old.

All I am saying is that it doesn't matter. Lottery magnet is no longer a magnet. It is an oxymoron. MCPS has been obfuscating for a while and will never tell you what local norming means. It is just something they can use to manipulate.

ox·y·mo·ron
/ˌäksəˈmôrˌän/
Learn to pronounce
noun
a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction (e.g. faith unfaithful kept him falsely true ).

Also lottery magnet. You can have a lottery or you can have a magnet program, not both.

u sound like an oxymoron!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course you can have both.

I need to find someone who can regularly dunk a basketball. Anyone that is at least 6ft5in and normal BMI will be able to do the work.

I only need one - and there is more than one candidate that fits the bill.

It doesn't matter to me which one I choose because all I need is for that ball to be dunked. A lottery suits me just fine because I win no matter who I choose.

It means a lot more to the candidate - especially if they have made life plans around dunking basketballs.

Do some of them dunk better than others? Absolutely. Does it matter to me? Not at all.

Way to lose sight of the bigger picture. Aren't you supposed to be developing players for collegiate or professional level play?

You would pass on Michael Jordan just because some other kid was also tall

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course you can have both.

I need to find someone who can regularly dunk a basketball. Anyone that is at least 6ft5in and normal BMI will be able to do the work.

I only need one - and there is more than one candidate that fits the bill.

It doesn't matter to me which one I choose because all I need is for that ball to be dunked. A lottery suits me just fine because I win no matter who I choose.

It means a lot more to the candidate - especially if they have made life plans around dunking basketballs.

Do some of them dunk better than others? Absolutely. Does it matter to me? Not at all.

Way to lose sight of the bigger picture. Aren't you supposed to be developing players for collegiate or professional level play?

You would pass on Michael Jordan just because some other kid was also tall

Jordan famously got cut from his HS team.