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

[Anonymous]

We encourage you to work with your local middle school
principal for programming and grouping practices.

This is two-faced. They are telling us to talk to the principal about grouping practices, which suggests that MCPS policy is that high-performing kids should be grouped, yet when we go to the principals to ask for that, they will surely say that is completely counter to all their other policies that underperforming kids should be placed in the same classes as high achievers and everyone should be taking Honors classes. In fact, I have met exactly that resistance in previously asking for such grouping at the MS my second kid is now headed to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We encourage you to work with your local middle school
principal for programming and grouping practices.

This is two-faced. They are telling us to talk to the principal about grouping practices, which suggests that MCPS policy is that high-performing kids should be grouped, yet when we go to the principals to ask for that, they will surely say that is completely counter to all their other policies that underperforming kids should be placed in the same classes as high achievers and everyone should be taking Honors classes. In fact, I have met exactly that resistance in previously asking for such grouping at the MS my second kid is now headed to.

PP, it sounds like you're talking yourself into the self-fulfilling prophecy that there's no point in doing anything because it won't work anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about HGC students from CCES and Barnsley? Are they doing better than Cold Spring kids?

Page 20, 17:09, so far only bad news for Barnsley. No news report from CCES as far as I can remember.

No news report from anywhere. This is DCUM. DCUM is not a news outlet. DCUM is an Internet message board. On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

The year my smart kid didn't get into a MS magnet, I didn't post on DCUM to say: my kid didn't get into the MS magnet; this proves that the admissions process is flawed and that MCPS hates smart kids.

And did your DC get 4 99s, have straight As at an HGC vs. admitted kids having maybe one 98 or 99 and lower scores in the other three categories?

How do you know the scores and grades of the admitted kids?

(Multiple people have posted that a 99 covers a wide range of scores.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about HGC students from CCES and Barnsley? Are they doing better than Cold Spring kids?

Page 20, 17:09, so far only bad news for Barnsley. No news report from CCES as far as I can remember.

No news report from anywhere. This is DCUM. DCUM is not a news outlet. DCUM is an Internet message board. On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

The year my smart kid didn't get into a MS magnet, I didn't post on DCUM to say: my kid didn't get into the MS magnet; this proves that the admissions process is flawed and that MCPS hates smart kids.

And did your DC get 4 99s, have straight As at an HGC vs. admitted kids having maybe one 98 or 99 and lower scores in the other three categories?

I haven’t seen any real evidence - even counting postings here - that a significant number of kids with lower scores (not 99 across the board) got in.

[Anonymous]

Being told "not recommended but don't worry about it - there will be kids just as smart as yours spread out at your giant MS with none of the curriculum benefits" is what makes it more frustrating this year.

[Anonymous]

The curriculum at the home middle schools is very different than at the magnets. I have a child currently in 8th at a magnet and one in 6th at our home middle school and the differences I see have little to do with the peer group and much to do with the expectations and curriculum in the magnet subjects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid did not have an essay question about why they'd like to go to a magnet school.

I think I already had this confirmed on a different thread - that not ALL the ES kids tested had the essay element.

I think they all had it, but some made a bigger deal about it. It was 10 minutes or so to write and answer some questions. My kid didn't call it an essay just a question they wrote a few sentences to answer. I remember hearing it wasn't scored, but gave a student voice to the application at one of the meetings, so not sure how much it mattered anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about HGC students from CCES and Barnsley? Are they doing better than Cold Spring kids?

Page 20, 17:09, so far only bad news for Barnsley. No news report from CCES as far as I can remember.

No news report from anywhere. This is DCUM. DCUM is not a news outlet. DCUM is an Internet message board. On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

The year my smart kid didn't get into a MS magnet, I didn't post on DCUM to say: my kid didn't get into the MS magnet; this proves that the admissions process is flawed and that MCPS hates smart kids.

And did your DC get 4 99s, have straight As at an HGC vs. admitted kids having maybe one 98 or 99 and lower scores in the other three categories?

I haven’t seen any real evidence - even counting postings here - that a significant number of kids with lower scores (not 99 across the board) got in.

That's because the people who got in aren't posting their scores, for the most part they are simply reporting an acceptance. A few have said their kid didn't get straight 99's and others are not providing other information like MAP or PARCC scores, and that suggests that their kids did not have straight 99's combined with the other high metrics of the rejected students. That is their right not to post the scores, and who can blame them, as there will be some people who make nasty comments about their kid getting in. But it's highly unlikely that the people who got in are just naturally the ones who would not be inclined to share test scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So if test scores aren't the criteria then what is?

Oh for goodness sake, what sour grapes. Of course test scores are still the criteria. But there are a whole heck of a lot of kids with 99% scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Being told "not recommended but don't worry about it - there will be kids just as smart as yours spread out at your giant MS with none of the curriculum benefits" is what makes it more frustrating this year.

PP, this is nothing new.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if test scores aren't the criteria then what is?

Oh for goodness sake, what sour grapes. Of course test scores are still the criteria. But there are a whole heck of a lot of kids with 99% scores.

Here are the things they looked at:

The review is a multiple measure process from both system and external measures. The data that was included: Grade 5 report card, school assessments: percentile ranks for the Measures of Adequate Progress in Reading and Math, state assessment: PARCC achievement levels for reading and math data*, instructional need, student services^, non-scored student questionnaire, and an outside assessment: (Cognitive Test of Abilities Test (CogAT) full battery.
* PARCC is only used to see a pattern of performance of grade level indicators
^ services such as receiving special education services, ESOL- English for Speakers of Other Languages, 504 accommodations plan and Free and Reduced Meals

[Anonymous]

"That's because the people who got in aren't posting their scores, for the most part they are simply reporting an acceptance. A few have said their kid didn't get straight 99's and others are not providing other information like MAP or PARCC scores, and that suggests that their kids did not have straight 99's combined with the other high metrics of the rejected students. That is their right not to post the scores, and who can blame them, as there will be some people who make nasty comments about their kid getting in. But it's highly unlikely that the people who got in are just naturally the ones who would not be inclined to share test scores. "

Actually, this is flawed reasoning. I posted earlier saying DC got accepted to both and that she had 99s across the board. I didn't post MAP or PARCC scores because PARCC scores (on which she scored the highest BTW) seemed irrelevant and because I have no idea what her MAP scores are because I haven't scrutinized of the results every possible testing occasion and don't even remember receiving them. (I also didn't post that yes, she had straight As on her report card because why would I post that?) My point is that is is a flawed assumption to assume that not posting this information means the information was unflattering; there are all sorts of reasons people might post every little minor fact of their child's academic career in fifth grade!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"That's because the people who got in aren't posting their scores, for the most part they are simply reporting an acceptance. A few have said their kid didn't get straight 99's and others are not providing other information like MAP or PARCC scores, and that suggests that their kids did not have straight 99's combined with the other high metrics of the rejected students. That is their right not to post the scores, and who can blame them, as there will be some people who make nasty comments about their kid getting in. But it's highly unlikely that the people who got in are just naturally the ones who would not be inclined to share test scores. "

Actually, this is flawed reasoning. I posted earlier saying DC got accepted to both and that she had 99s across the board. I didn't post MAP or PARCC scores because PARCC scores (on which she scored the highest BTW) seemed irrelevant and because I have no idea what her MAP scores are because I haven't scrutinized of the results every possible testing occasion and don't even remember receiving them. (I also didn't post that yes, she had straight As on her report card because why would I post that?) My point is that is is a flawed assumption to assume that not posting this information means the information was unflattering; there are all sorts of reasons people might post every little minor fact of their child's academic career in fifth grade!

PP again--I meant there are reasons people might NOT post every minor detail!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"That's because the people who got in aren't posting their scores, for the most part they are simply reporting an acceptance. A few have said their kid didn't get straight 99's and others are not providing other information like MAP or PARCC scores, and that suggests that their kids did not have straight 99's combined with the other high metrics of the rejected students. That is their right not to post the scores, and who can blame them, as there will be some people who make nasty comments about their kid getting in. But it's highly unlikely that the people who got in are just naturally the ones who would not be inclined to share test scores. "

Actually, this is flawed reasoning. I posted earlier saying DC got accepted to both and that she had 99s across the board. I didn't post MAP or PARCC scores because PARCC scores (on which she scored the highest BTW) seemed irrelevant and because I have no idea what her MAP scores are because I haven't scrutinized of the results every possible testing occasion and don't even remember receiving them. (I also didn't post that yes, she had straight As on her report card because why would I post that?) My point is that is is a flawed assumption to assume that not posting this information means the information was unflattering; there are all sorts of reasons people might post every little minor fact of their child's academic career in fifth grade!

Pretty convenient that you don't "remember" her MAP scores, PP. It's the selective presentation of metrics that's of interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Pretty convenient that you don't "remember" her MAP scores, PP. It's the selective presentation of metrics that's of interest.

DP. Oh good grief. PP, perhaps some perspective? Your kid did not get in. It's not the end of the world. Your kid will be fine. And you will be fine, once you stop brooding over the epic injustice that your deserving kid didn't get in and some other, obviously undeserving kid did.