Magnet Middle School Thread: MAP scores and results

[Anonymous]

You seem to keep suggesting this. Since you know so much, why don't you fill out the paperwork, read through the reems of paper they'll send you, analyze the data, condense down to the main points, waste many hours in the process, risk the ire of MCPS, and then report back to us months later. 🙄

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
You seem to keep suggesting this. Since you know so much, why don't you fill out the paperwork, read through the reems of paper they'll send you, analyze the data, condense down to the main points, waste many hours in the process, risk the ire of MCPS, and then report back to us months later. 🙄

Not the PP, but when there's pushback on a policy government institutions count on this "I don't want to do work" attitude to keep things away from the public. What exactly is the risk of incurring the ire of MCPS?

[Anonymous]

Not PP either, but I ask the person who brought it up to consider doing the work. I have a child coming up in a couple of years who could benefit, as I'm sure others on here do too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know you can file a Maryland Public Information request and MCPS would have to release information such as:

Number of kids considered county wide and by school
Number of kids placed in lottery pool countywide and by school
whether 1 lottery pool was run or several and if several what criteria (sex or other statuses?)
breakdown of number of kids considered with IEPs, 504 plans, FARMS status and by race
Range, mean and median of MAP scores and GPAs of considered students, pooled students and lottery winner students
number of waitlisted students
number of acceptance/declines of admissions offers

I’d also want to know how the admitted cohort of students broke out by sex, race, ethnicity, ESOL, FARMS and IEP and 504 status compared to the same categories of admitted students last year and the year before to see how the pandemic affected the process.

But it's so much more rewarding to whinge on DCUM!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know you can file a Maryland Public Information request and MCPS would have to release information such as:

Number of kids considered county wide and by school
Number of kids placed in lottery pool countywide and by school
whether 1 lottery pool was run or several and if several what criteria (sex or other statuses?)
breakdown of number of kids considered with IEPs, 504 plans, FARMS status and by race
Range, mean and median of MAP scores and GPAs of considered students, pooled students and lottery winner students
number of waitlisted students
number of acceptance/declines of admissions offers

I’d also want to know how the admitted cohort of students broke out by sex, race, ethnicity, ESOL, FARMS and IEP and 504 status compared to the same categories of admitted students last year and the year before to see how the pandemic affected the process.

MAP-M and Math magnet results:
232 - not in pool
234 - not in pool
242 - in pool
244 - in pool (selected)
245 - in pool
252 - in pool (selected)
255 - not in pool
255 - in pool
262 - in pool
268 - in pool
272 - in pool (and in-bounds for TPMS, but not selected)
283 - in pool

MAP-R and Humanities magnet results:
235 - in pool
235 - in pool
237 - in pool
238 - in pool
239- in pool (selected)
240- not in pool
240 - in pool
240 - in pool
240 - in pool
245 - in pool
245 - in pool
256 - in pool

Just looking at the reported stats it's a safe bet that like previous years 95% of the students selected will be in the top 5%, BUT since selection was by lottery and the bulk of the pool is in the 240-255 range, it's likely there will be many real outliers next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know you can file a Maryland Public Information request and MCPS would have to release information such as:

Number of kids considered county wide and by school
Number of kids placed in lottery pool countywide and by school
whether 1 lottery pool was run or several and if several what criteria (sex or other statuses?)
breakdown of number of kids considered with IEPs, 504 plans, FARMS status and by race
Range, mean and median of MAP scores and GPAs of considered students, pooled students and lottery winner students
number of waitlisted students
number of acceptance/declines of admissions offers

I’d also want to know how the admitted cohort of students broke out by sex, race, ethnicity, ESOL, FARMS and IEP and 504 status compared to the same categories of admitted students last year and the year before to see how the pandemic affected the process.

MAP-M and Math magnet results:
232 - not in pool
234 - not in pool
242 - in pool
244 - in pool (selected)
245 - in pool
252 - in pool (selected)
255 - not in pool
255 - in pool
262 - in pool
268 - in pool
272 - in pool (and in-bounds for TPMS, but not selected)
283 - in pool

MAP-R and Humanities magnet results:
235 - in pool
235 - in pool
237 - in pool
238 - in pool
239- in pool (selected)
240- not in pool
240 - in pool
240 - in pool
240 - in pool
245 - in pool
245 - in pool
256 - in pool

Just looking at the reported stats it's a safe bet that like previous years 95% of the students selected will be in the top 5%, BUT since selection was by lottery and the bulk of the pool is in the 240-255 range, it's likely there will be many real outliers next year.

You should have smart kids but FEW outliers.

[Anonymous]

Few prepped outliers ... yes, yes, we've been through this before. Why do people keep resurrecting the same tired topic over and over again. Go back and reread the thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Few prepped outliers ... yes, yes, we've been through this before. Why do people keep resurrecting the same tired topic over and over again. Go back and reread the thread.

So the less capable preppers were admitted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know you can file a Maryland Public Information request and MCPS would have to release information such as:

Number of kids considered county wide and by school
Number of kids placed in lottery pool countywide and by school
whether 1 lottery pool was run or several and if several what criteria (sex or other statuses?)
breakdown of number of kids considered with IEPs, 504 plans, FARMS status and by race
Range, mean and median of MAP scores and GPAs of considered students, pooled students and lottery winner students
number of waitlisted students
number of acceptance/declines of admissions offers

I’d also want to know how the admitted cohort of students broke out by sex, race, ethnicity, ESOL, FARMS and IEP and 504 status compared to the same categories of admitted students last year and the year before to see how the pandemic affected the process.

MAP-M and Math magnet results:
232 - not in pool
234 - not in pool
242 - in pool
244 - in pool (selected)
245 - in pool
252 - in pool (selected)
255 - not in pool
255 - in pool
262 - in pool
268 - in pool
272 - in pool (and in-bounds for TPMS, but not selected)
283 - in pool

MAP-R and Humanities magnet results:
235 - in pool
235 - in pool
237 - in pool
238 - in pool
239- in pool (selected)
240- not in pool
240 - in pool
240 - in pool
240 - in pool
245 - in pool
245 - in pool
256 - in pool

Just looking at the reported stats it's a safe bet that like previous years 95% of the students selected will be in the top 5%, BUT since selection was by lottery and the bulk of the pool is in the 240-255 range, it's likely there will be many real outliers next year.

You should have smart kids but FEW outliers.

The class will be fine since they're all above average but will not have the same number of truly gifted students like years past.

[Anonymous]

I get the impression that the county is purposely sabotaging the magnets by selecting less capable students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I get the impression that the county is purposely sabotaging the magnets by selecting less capable students.

Ooh! A long term project to end magnets! Interesting theory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The class will be fine since they're all above average but will not have the same number of truly gifted students like years past.

I'm not sure how you're generalizing based on a few handfuls of test scores based on a test that was zoom-proctored and self-reported on an anonymous forum, but this year's class won't be dissimilar from previous years. We all know there are many more qualified kids than spots available at the magnets. The ones that get there will benefit from the programs, but there are other challenges in the future for your child to distinguish themselves: HS, college, grad school, jobs, etc. This is just one of many. No need to fret.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The class will be fine since they're all above average but will not have the same number of truly gifted students like years past.

I'm not sure how you're generalizing based on a few handfuls of test scores based on a test that was zoom-proctored and self-reported on an anonymous forum, but this year's class won't be dissimilar from previous years. We all know there are many more qualified kids than spots available at the magnets. The ones that get there will benefit from the programs, but there are other challenges in the future for your child to distinguish themselves: HS, college, grad school, jobs, etc. This is just one of many. No need to fret.

The sample posted here just coroborates the method which the county claims they used.

[Anonymous]

Can you cite any data to conclude that this year's class is much different from previous years? If anything, in previous years, the cutoff was 95 percentile on MAP-M and the self-reported scores put the cutoff this year at 98 percentile. One would infer from the self-reported data here on DCUM that this year's class is higher caliber.

[Anonymous]

My child has been through all of the magnets (ES, MS, HS). Even in the days where the admission was truly merit based, there were only less than 10 truly gifted students. But that was enough to carry the brand-name of the program on a national level. With the current selection procedure, I'm not sure that's sustainable.