Magnet MS results - Takoma Park & Eastern - anyone heard today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe the Dr Li factor negatively affected Cold Spring acceptance?

Seems likely. New test, no benefit from training for the math problems on the old one?

My Cold Spring kid was a 99%er on this test as usual, just like many of the other rejected kids listed above. 150+ Map scores in both areas, college-level lexile. Next theory?

Did you use Dr. Li?

Asian students as a group over achieve in every possible academic measure. If their success is due to tutoring services, you should consider to enroll your kids to Dr. Li, seriously!

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Maybe the Dr Li factor negatively affected Cold Spring acceptance? [/quote]

Seems likely. New test, no benefit from training for the math problems on the old one?[/quote]

My Cold Spring kid was a 99%er on this test as usual, just like many of the other rejected kids listed above. 150+ Map scores in both areas, college-level lexile. Next theory?[/quote]

Did you use Dr. Li?
[/quote]

Asian students as a group over achieve in every possible academic measure. If their success is due to tutoring services, you should consider to enroll your kids to Dr. Li, seriously![/quote]

+1

Besides, not any other Michael Phelps' teammates became another Michael Phelps, not even close, just simply because they had the same coach. If you really believe Dr.Li were the magic cure, you probably should get paid for advertising for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not get the whole cohort thing. Cohort is something, but it is not everything & is certainly not curriculum. The curriculum at the MSMs is really different. Far more challenging and stimulating than even high performing non mag equivalents.

When my kids was at Piney Branch, there was a string cohort, but she also had kids who way underperformed as well. Teachers cannot create and manage a depth chart of curricula for such a span of learning levels. The cohort helps, but the curriculum is needed to. When she got into Pine Crest (this goes for both my kids), the curriculum made all the difference. Now both at TPMS -- cohort in mag and non mag is good and stimulating, but it's the mad curriculum that makes the difference.

I do not get this system. The MCPS study showed that test based admission was biased against minorities & FARMs, but what data do they have now besides test (& geography)? They ditched the essays, the activities, the awards, the teacher recs. The report talks about additional factors towards success, & they just dismissed all of them. My kids did well on the tests, but they worked exceptionally hard on their essays. And they were very engaged and had strong teacher recs. And, they had national level extra-curriculars (which shows dedication & passion). They are doing very well in magnet & oldest accepted to 5 HS app programs, including most competitive. Clearly study and empirical evidence shows that it needs to be more than test + geography, Why, then, would they just scale back to test? Makes no sense. So glad we got through before this.

Above Poster here -- wow, I really can't type! string = strong, mad = mag, "kid was" at Piney Branch. This is like an expressionist stream of consciousness. + typos. Sorry y'all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe the Dr Li factor negatively affected Cold Spring acceptance?

Seems likely. New test, no benefit from training for the math problems on the old one?

My Cold Spring kid was a 99%er on this test as usual, just like many of the other rejected kids listed above. 150+ Map scores in both areas, college-level lexile. Next theory?

As a previous PP has said, 99% represents a standard age score of 135-160. You'll have to call MCPS to find out if the actual standard age score was more on the 135 end or more on the 160 end.

I think this is worth repeating and emphasizing. All 99th %iles are not created equal, and we're not seeing the underlying granular data that the committee presumably had in front of them. If you look at the explanations for COGAT scores, there are lots of other numbers that get reported, including raw ("standard age") scores for each section, and a sort of student profile that gives a shorthand analysis of their strengths and weaknesses. Frankly, MCPS kind of shot themselves in the foot by only reporting percentile scores—they must have known a huge number of kids would have scores that looked "perfect" in percentile form—and now they're never going to hear the end of it.

That said, it sounds like the Cold Spring kids did fall victim to the cohort clause. There must have been enough students with similar overall data zoned for each MS that they deemed them to have a peer group, and only the real outliers from that group were sent on to the magnets. But I feel sure the Cold Spring parents are up to the challenge of advocating for accelerated instruction for their cohort.

[Anonymous]

For those that are shocked by difficulty in admission, doesn't this FAQ from MCPS cover a lot of it:

My child scores for the various criteria are in the 90+ percentiles, why did my child not get
selected?
This year, the process looked at all fifth grade elementary students in 80 elementary schools. This
changed our examination of student need for magnet programs to considering over 4,000 Grade 5
students – a sharp increase to the previous traditional parent application process which yielded a look
at fewer students, 700 to 800 applicants total.
This year’s process included looking at the Grade 5 report card, reading level, math enrichment access,
MAP-R and MAP-M, PARCC performance in reading and math, student questionnaire, student voice
and the outside assessment. An additional variable of looking at students through the lens of comparable
academic peer group within a school accessing enriched and acceleration instruction in core content
areas, was part of the process.
Your child, while high performing, has an academic peer group within her local school and doesn’t
present as an outlier within that group. We encourage you to work with your local middle school
principal for programming and grouping practices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe the Dr Li factor negatively affected Cold Spring acceptance?

Seems likely. New test, no benefit from training for the math problems on the old one?

My Cold Spring kid was a 99%er on this test as usual, just like many of the other rejected kids listed above. 150+ Map scores in both areas, college-level lexile. Next theory?

As a previous PP has said, 99% represents a standard age score of 135-160. You'll have to call MCPS to find out if the actual standard age score was more on the 135 end or more on the 160 end. And the MAP scores of 150+ are nothing outstanding.

I'm sorry that you're disappointed.

Much seems to have changed this time around. Interesting that CAPA-MC website reports MCPS officials said the decision committee would not know home school or ethnicity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not get the whole cohort thing. Cohort is something, but it is not everything & is certainly not curriculum. The curriculum at the MSMs is really different. Far more challenging and stimulating than even high performing non mag equivalents.

When my kids was at Piney Branch, there was a string cohort, but she also had kids who way underperformed as well. Teachers cannot create and manage a depth chart of curricula for such a span of learning levels. The cohort helps, but the curriculum is needed to. When she got into Pine Crest (this goes for both my kids), the curriculum made all the difference. Now both at TPMS -- cohort in mag and non mag is good and stimulating, but it's the mad curriculum that makes the difference.

I do not get this system. The MCPS study showed that test based admission was biased against minorities & FARMs, but what data do they have now besides test (& geography)? They ditched the essays, the activities, the awards, the teacher recs. The report talks about additional factors towards success, & they just dismissed all of them. My kids did well on the tests, but they worked exceptionally hard on their essays. And they were very engaged and had strong teacher recs. And, they had national level extra-curriculars (which shows dedication & passion). They are doing very well in magnet & oldest accepted to 5 HS app programs, including most competitive. Clearly study and empirical evidence shows that it needs to be more than test + geography, Why, then, would they just scale back to test? Makes no sense. So glad we got through before this.

Your second paragraph works the other way too. Cohort is important because a lot of teachers cut corners on diferentiating the curriculum. My child withered in third grade at a focus school due to a administration who were hyperfocused on raising test scores, and a teacher who let my child run free range on Prodigy video game every day as a substitution for comprehensiive lesson planning for students who were excelling. Additionally, it was infuriating to see my child with a deficit in spelling skipped over for spelling interventions which her friends at other schools were receiving just because she was a strong reader.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe the Dr Li factor negatively affected Cold Spring acceptance?

Seems likely. New test, no benefit from training for the math problems on the old one?

My Cold Spring kid was a 99%er on this test as usual, just like many of the other rejected kids listed above. 150+ Map scores in both areas, college-level lexile. Next theory?

Did you use Dr. Li?

Serious question. Who is Dr. Li?

-Cold Spring parent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe the Dr Li factor negatively affected Cold Spring acceptance?

Seems likely. New test, no benefit from training for the math problems on the old one?

My Cold Spring kid was a 99%er on this test as usual, just like many of the other rejected kids listed above. 150+ Map scores in both areas, college-level lexile. Next theory?

As a previous PP has said, 99% represents a standard age score of 135-160. You'll have to call MCPS to find out if the actual standard age score was more on the 135 end or more on the 160 end.

I think this is worth repeating and emphasizing. All 99th %iles are not created equal, and we're not seeing the underlying granular data that the committee presumably had in front of them. If you look at the explanations for COGAT scores, there are lots of other numbers that get reported, including raw ("standard age") scores for each section, and a sort of student profile that gives a shorthand analysis of their strengths and weaknesses. Frankly, MCPS kind of shot themselves in the foot by only reporting percentile scores—they must have known a huge number of kids would have scores that looked "perfect" in percentile form—and now they're never going to hear the end of it.

MCPS did not shoot themselves in the foot, it was a deliberate strategy not to give any more specific data. Then what will they tell parents of kids who scored in the 150-160 range? "Your home school, which does not offer magnet-level instruction, is perfectly fine." Um, no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those that are shocked by difficulty in admission, doesn't this FAQ from MCPS cover a lot of it:

My child scores for the various criteria are in the 90+ percentiles, why did my child not get
selected?
This year, the process looked at all fifth grade elementary students in 80 elementary schools. This
changed our examination of student need for magnet programs to considering over 4,000 Grade 5
students – a sharp increase to the previous traditional parent application process which yielded a look
at fewer students, 700 to 800 applicants total.
This year’s process included looking at the Grade 5 report card, reading level, math enrichment access,
MAP-R and MAP-M, PARCC performance in reading and math, student questionnaire, student voice
and the outside assessment. An additional variable of looking at students through the lens of comparable
academic peer group within a school accessing enriched and acceleration instruction in core content
areas, was part of the process.
Your child, while high performing, has an academic peer group within her local school and doesn’t
present as an outlier within that group. We encourage you to work with your local middle school
principal for programming and grouping practices.

Well this does say the number of candidates went way up. In the past HGC families tended to apply, others not so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe the Dr Li factor negatively affected Cold Spring acceptance?

Seems likely. New test, no benefit from training for the math problems on the old one?

My Cold Spring kid was a 99%er on this test as usual, just like many of the other rejected kids listed above. 150+ Map scores in both areas, college-level lexile. Next theory?

Did you use Dr. Li?

Serious question. Who is Dr. Li?

-Cold Spring parent

Dr. Li, he is a joke. He runs parallel school promising big things and doesn’t deliver. He can’t even speak English properly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC accepted to Eastern. 99 percentile verbal, lower in the others. Pyle MS.

What race? Do you have IEP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe the Dr Li factor negatively affected Cold Spring acceptance?

Seems likely. New test, no benefit from training for the math problems on the old one?

My Cold Spring kid was a 99%er on this test as usual, just like many of the other rejected kids listed above. 150+ Map scores in both areas, college-level lexile. Next theory?

Did you use Dr. Li?

Serious question. Who is Dr. Li?

-Cold Spring parent

There are a number of posters who are convinced that the main reason Asian children and children from richer neighborhoods are over represented in Magnet programs is because they take prep classes to get ready for the test. I believe one of the tutoring companies is called Dr Li
Signed
Asian parent of a kid who got into the HGC, TPMS, Eastern, RMIB and Blair and did not prep

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those that are shocked by difficulty in admission, doesn't this FAQ from MCPS cover a lot of it:

My child scores for the various criteria are in the 90+ percentiles, why did my child not get
selected?
This year, the process looked at all fifth grade elementary students in 80 elementary schools. This
changed our examination of student need for magnet programs to considering over 4,000 Grade 5
students – a sharp increase to the previous traditional parent application process which yielded a look
at fewer students, 700 to 800 applicants total.
This year’s process included looking at the Grade 5 report card, reading level, math enrichment access,
MAP-R and MAP-M, PARCC performance in reading and math, student questionnaire, student voice
and the outside assessment. An additional variable of looking at students through the lens of comparable
academic peer group within a school accessing enriched and acceleration instruction in core content
areas, was part of the process.
Your child, while high performing, has an academic peer group within her local school and doesn’t
present as an outlier within that group. We encourage you to work with your local middle school
principal for programming and grouping practices.

What a shame for the last sentence on this FAQ answer! It’s like it’s all your fault to be smart and work hard and can afford a W cluster house. Now wipe your own ass cos it’s none of my business any more. Shame on MCPS!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those that are shocked by difficulty in admission, doesn't this FAQ from MCPS cover a lot of it:

My child scores for the various criteria are in the 90+ percentiles, why did my child not get
selected?
This year, the process looked at all fifth grade elementary students in 80 elementary schools. This
changed our examination of student need for magnet programs to considering over 4,000 Grade 5
students – a sharp increase to the previous traditional parent application process which yielded a look
at fewer students, 700 to 800 applicants total.
This year’s process included looking at the Grade 5 report card, reading level, math enrichment access,
MAP-R and MAP-M, PARCC performance in reading and math, student questionnaire, student voice
and the outside assessment. An additional variable of looking at students through the lens of comparable
academic peer group within a school accessing enriched and acceleration instruction in core content
areas, was part of the process.
Your child, while high performing, has an academic peer group within her local school and doesn’t
present as an outlier within that group. We encourage you to work with your local middle school
principal for programming and grouping practices.

What a shame for the last sentence on this FAQ answer! It’s like it’s all your fault to be smart and work hard and can afford a W cluster house. Now wipe your own ass cos it’s none of my business any more. Shame on MCPS!

+1 That's really ridiculous.