Magnet application result High School

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped by Dr Li

Good Essays = They probably used an essay consultant

All around performance = Their parents had the luxury of time and money to ferry them to sports or music.

Hence all advanced programs should only have student ID put into a lottery and numbers pulled out like Powerball.

Could the kids have worked hard or just be smart??? Are you kidding!!! That could never happen.

But this is true of white kids as well, right?

High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped at home

Good Essays = Proof-read and edited by a highly educated native English speaking parent

All around performance = Parents with time and energy to drive to travel soccer, volunteer opportunities, etc.

Hush. Get with the program. All Magnet acceptance posts on DCUM are for Asian bashing. You should not be saying "But others could have this advantage too"

LOL. I'm the PP and I'm writing as a white parent whose child was admitted to their preferred program(s). I fully acknowledge the ways in which my child's privilege is part of the equation here. In my case, it's not income (we're genuinely middle class, not just DCUM middle class), and it's not paid test prep, but it's pretty clear that my child's extracurriculars were a big part of their successful package. Those extracurriculars are extremely time consuming, and require one parent to either have a flexible work schedule or to be a SAHP.

There's nothing wrong with admitting that privilege is in the mix here. I can't undo the years that I spend driving my kid to their activity, and they have worked incredibly hard to get to the level that they have. It demonstrates something about them, for sure. But it would not have been possible without some specific circumstances at home.

Correct. And the choices you made (or had the ability to make) and priorities you had for your kid coupled with their interests. That is why I get particularly peeved when DCUM always characterizes Asians as not-intelligent robots coming through the Dr Li factory.

signed - An immigrant whose kid did not go to prep classes and got admitted to 7 Magnet programs.

DP I agree that characterization is unfair and racist. But I also think it appears in reaction to claims that Asian students are discriminated against by the selection committees, when there is absolutely no evidence to support this and overwhelming evidence that they are in fact over represented.

PP- My problem is there should be no concept of representation or over representation for these admissions. May the best kids get selected, whatever the criteria is. There should not be a "Your race is 13% of the population, so the 14th student who gets admitted in a 100 seat program means you are over-represented"

Look, I absolutely understand your frustration. And this is for anyone thinking kids like mine shouldn't have been chosen:
My kid is one of those "surprises" for Blair and I'm going to tell you how we approached application and perhaps it might help you see it in a different view. Why the committee chose them.
My kid knew they did not have the top map scores. They love math but science is their passion and that includes computer science too.
I don't want to identify myself or my child but because of my job, I approached the application as a job application. If a candidate doesn't have the top education or experience I listed on the job post, what do I want to see on the resume that could make me think yes, this is the IT guy I want.
So, in the award section, they listed awards or achievements strictly outside of school that showed discipline and hard work.
In the hobbies, they put one instrument (not a common one) one sports that takes discipline. One artistic hobby, two leasure ones and 2 that shows an interest in math science and computer science at home.
In the volunteer section, two that have nothing to do with SSL hours.
Their essay was written in their own voice, not very polished and rather short. They demonstrated a lifelong passion for science and computer science and strong work ethic as well as loving to collaborate with peers that they can learn from. Basically selling their soft skills as a way to offset a lower map score than others.
They were accepted into all of their choices so it means that different committees found their application compelling.
Remember that the map scores are only ONE criteria, the first one mentioned is a strong demonstrated interest in math science and computer science. They did not focus on math on the application but on all 3 subjects.
Again, I'm sorry. It feels unfair when the kid obviously worked very hard but that doesn't mean my kid deserves it less. My kid wants to be a scientist and they are doing stellar in science. Cogat was 99 percentile in 5th grade. They're a good fit for the magnet. Again I'm sorry.

And, you think other families did not do that too?

Well, if they didn't get admitted, they must've not done it as well.

Or luck was in your favor and not theirs. My kid got into Blair for stem but we recognize that luck plays a big role.

Do you really think that kid who got into all four or five programs they applied to (or more) just got “lucky” that multiple different selection committees saw merit in their application? Or if it more likely that they actually had a convincing application, one that was more convincing than those that are not admitted?

Most people upset on this thread are talking about Blair admissions and Blair admissions only.

Kids that get into Blair and RM will also easily get into the other programs as their test scores have to be pretty decent to get into both so we're not really talking about many selection committees taking a kid with lower scores and letting them in. I think she said 260s for reading and 270s for math which I'm pretty sure is 99th percentile for both and in line with I've seen people list as their child's MAP scores in the past for both Blair and RM.

I do think luck did have something to do with her child getting in to Blair. I also think luck had something to do with my child getting in to Blair too even though DC also had 99th percentile MAP scores on both.

That was a different poster. You’re missing the point though. If a kid who got in to Blair also got in to multiple other programs it pretty much proves the point that they had a convincing application. So you can say the kid got in unfairly to all of the programs (unlikely) or you can acknowledge that their application convinced multiple selection committees that they were a strong candidate regardless of their MAP score.

[Anonymous]

I don't think people are putting themselves on the list. Students happen to know each other's scores because they informally compete.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped by Dr Li

Good Essays = They probably used an essay consultant

All around performance = Their parents had the luxury of time and money to ferry them to sports or music.

Hence all advanced programs should only have student ID put into a lottery and numbers pulled out like Powerball.

Could the kids have worked hard or just be smart??? Are you kidding!!! That could never happen.

But this is true of white kids as well, right?

High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped at home

Good Essays = Proof-read and edited by a highly educated native English speaking parent

All around performance = Parents with time and energy to drive to travel soccer, volunteer opportunities, etc.

Hush. Get with the program. All Magnet acceptance posts on DCUM are for Asian bashing. You should not be saying "But others could have this advantage too"

LOL. I'm the PP and I'm writing as a white parent whose child was admitted to their preferred program(s). I fully acknowledge the ways in which my child's privilege is part of the equation here. In my case, it's not income (we're genuinely middle class, not just DCUM middle class), and it's not paid test prep, but it's pretty clear that my child's extracurriculars were a big part of their successful package. Those extracurriculars are extremely time consuming, and require one parent to either have a flexible work schedule or to be a SAHP.

There's nothing wrong with admitting that privilege is in the mix here. I can't undo the years that I spend driving my kid to their activity, and they have worked incredibly hard to get to the level that they have. It demonstrates something about them, for sure. But it would not have been possible without some specific circumstances at home.

Correct. And the choices you made (or had the ability to make) and priorities you had for your kid coupled with their interests. That is why I get particularly peeved when DCUM always characterizes Asians as not-intelligent robots coming through the Dr Li factory.

signed - An immigrant whose kid did not go to prep classes and got admitted to 7 Magnet programs.

DP I agree that characterization is unfair and racist. But I also think it appears in reaction to claims that Asian students are discriminated against by the selection committees, when there is absolutely no evidence to support this and overwhelming evidence that they are in fact over represented.

PP- My problem is there should be no concept of representation or over representation for these admissions. May the best kids get selected, whatever the criteria is. There should not be a "Your race is 13% of the population, so the 14th student who gets admitted in a 100 seat program means you are over-represented"

Look, I absolutely understand your frustration. And this is for anyone thinking kids like mine shouldn't have been chosen:
My kid is one of those "surprises" for Blair and I'm going to tell you how we approached application and perhaps it might help you see it in a different view. Why the committee chose them.
My kid knew they did not have the top map scores. They love math but science is their passion and that includes computer science too.
I don't want to identify myself or my child but because of my job, I approached the application as a job application. If a candidate doesn't have the top education or experience I listed on the job post, what do I want to see on the resume that could make me think yes, this is the IT guy I want.
So, in the award section, they listed awards or achievements strictly outside of school that showed discipline and hard work.
In the hobbies, they put one instrument (not a common one) one sports that takes discipline. One artistic hobby, two leasure ones and 2 that shows an interest in math science and computer science at home.
In the volunteer section, two that have nothing to do with SSL hours.
Their essay was written in their own voice, not very polished and rather short. They demonstrated a lifelong passion for science and computer science and strong work ethic as well as loving to collaborate with peers that they can learn from. Basically selling their soft skills as a way to offset a lower map score than others.
They were accepted into all of their choices so it means that different committees found their application compelling.
Remember that the map scores are only ONE criteria, the first one mentioned is a strong demonstrated interest in math science and computer science. They did not focus on math on the application but on all 3 subjects.
Again, I'm sorry. It feels unfair when the kid obviously worked very hard but that doesn't mean my kid deserves it less. My kid wants to be a scientist and they are doing stellar in science. Cogat was 99 percentile in 5th grade. They're a good fit for the magnet. Again I'm sorry.

And, you think other families did not do that too?

Well, if they didn't get admitted, they must've not done it as well.

Or luck was in your favor and not theirs. My kid got into Blair for stem but we recognize that luck plays a big role.

Do you really think that kid who got into all four or five programs they applied to (or more) just got “lucky” that multiple different selection committees saw merit in their application? Or if it more likely that they actually had a convincing application, one that was more convincing than those that are not admitted?

Most people upset on this thread are talking about Blair admissions and Blair admissions only.

Kids that get into Blair and RM will also easily get into the other programs as their test scores have to be pretty decent to get into both so we're not really talking about many selection committees taking a kid with lower scores and letting them in. I think she said 260s for reading and 270s for math which I'm pretty sure is 99th percentile for both and in line with I've seen people list as their child's MAP scores in the past for both Blair and RM.

I do think luck did have something to do with her child getting in to Blair. I also think luck had something to do with my child getting in to Blair too even though DC also had 99th percentile MAP scores on both.

That was a different poster. You’re missing the point though. If a kid who got in to Blair also got in to multiple other programs it pretty much proves the point that they had a convincing application. So you can say the kid got in unfairly to all of the programs (unlikely) or you can acknowledge that their application convinced multiple selection committees that they were a strong candidate regardless of their MAP score.

You're not understanding the point.
The point is the child got in to most programs because the child had high MAP scores. Full stop. Those scores are outlier scores/top scores in most programs other than Blair.
There was one lucky call and the lucky call was Blair.

[Anonymous]

Of the 800 kids that apply to Blair it's a safe bet that half of them have a 4.0 and are in the 99% nationally on their MAP-M and if that's true, which isn't all that implausible, it would be difficult to differentiate between those 400 applicants. At that point it's even kind of a crap shoot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think people are putting themselves on the list. Students happen to know each other's scores because they informally compete.

This is exactly why I am advocating going back to a more broader selection which was there before. Including cogat/other test. Rather just a Math material test which is MAP M. If you study beyond what is taught in class, you get a better score. So kids are doing this through AOPs and things like that.

[Anonymous]

The kids are making a list?

Ew, gross.

But, given the hand-wringing on here, it's no wonder they are ranking themselves like this and are tied up in knots about this.

Depressing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped by Dr Li

Good Essays = They probably used an essay consultant

All around performance = Their parents had the luxury of time and money to ferry them to sports or music.

Hence all advanced programs should only have student ID put into a lottery and numbers pulled out like Powerball.

Could the kids have worked hard or just be smart??? Are you kidding!!! That could never happen.

But this is true of white kids as well, right?

High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped at home

Good Essays = Proof-read and edited by a highly educated native English speaking parent

All around performance = Parents with time and energy to drive to travel soccer, volunteer opportunities, etc.

Hush. Get with the program. All Magnet acceptance posts on DCUM are for Asian bashing. You should not be saying "But others could have this advantage too"

LOL. I'm the PP and I'm writing as a white parent whose child was admitted to their preferred program(s). I fully acknowledge the ways in which my child's privilege is part of the equation here. In my case, it's not income (we're genuinely middle class, not just DCUM middle class), and it's not paid test prep, but it's pretty clear that my child's extracurriculars were a big part of their successful package. Those extracurriculars are extremely time consuming, and require one parent to either have a flexible work schedule or to be a SAHP.

There's nothing wrong with admitting that privilege is in the mix here. I can't undo the years that I spend driving my kid to their activity, and they have worked incredibly hard to get to the level that they have. It demonstrates something about them, for sure. But it would not have been possible without some specific circumstances at home.

Correct. And the choices you made (or had the ability to make) and priorities you had for your kid coupled with their interests. That is why I get particularly peeved when DCUM always characterizes Asians as not-intelligent robots coming through the Dr Li factory.

signed - An immigrant whose kid did not go to prep classes and got admitted to 7 Magnet programs.

DP I agree that characterization is unfair and racist. But I also think it appears in reaction to claims that Asian students are discriminated against by the selection committees, when there is absolutely no evidence to support this and overwhelming evidence that they are in fact over represented.

PP- My problem is there should be no concept of representation or over representation for these admissions. May the best kids get selected, whatever the criteria is. There should not be a "Your race is 13% of the population, so the 14th student who gets admitted in a 100 seat program means you are over-represented"

Look, I absolutely understand your frustration. And this is for anyone thinking kids like mine shouldn't have been chosen:
My kid is one of those "surprises" for Blair and I'm going to tell you how we approached application and perhaps it might help you see it in a different view. Why the committee chose them.
My kid knew they did not have the top map scores. They love math but science is their passion and that includes computer science too.
I don't want to identify myself or my child but because of my job, I approached the application as a job application. If a candidate doesn't have the top education or experience I listed on the job post, what do I want to see on the resume that could make me think yes, this is the IT guy I want.
So, in the award section, they listed awards or achievements strictly outside of school that showed discipline and hard work.
In the hobbies, they put one instrument (not a common one) one sports that takes discipline. One artistic hobby, two leasure ones and 2 that shows an interest in math science and computer science at home.
In the volunteer section, two that have nothing to do with SSL hours.
Their essay was written in their own voice, not very polished and rather short. They demonstrated a lifelong passion for science and computer science and strong work ethic as well as loving to collaborate with peers that they can learn from. Basically selling their soft skills as a way to offset a lower map score than others.
They were accepted into all of their choices so it means that different committees found their application compelling.
Remember that the map scores are only ONE criteria, the first one mentioned is a strong demonstrated interest in math science and computer science. They did not focus on math on the application but on all 3 subjects.
Again, I'm sorry. It feels unfair when the kid obviously worked very hard but that doesn't mean my kid deserves it less. My kid wants to be a scientist and they are doing stellar in science. Cogat was 99 percentile in 5th grade. They're a good fit for the magnet. Again I'm sorry.

And, you think other families did not do that too?

Well, if they didn't get admitted, they must've not done it as well.

Or luck was in your favor and not theirs. My kid got into Blair for stem but we recognize that luck plays a big role.

Do you really think that kid who got into all four or five programs they applied to (or more) just got “lucky” that multiple different selection committees saw merit in their application? Or if it more likely that they actually had a convincing application, one that was more convincing than those that are not admitted?

Most people upset on this thread are talking about Blair admissions and Blair admissions only.

Kids that get into Blair and RM will also easily get into the other programs as their test scores have to be pretty decent to get into both so we're not really talking about many selection committees taking a kid with lower scores and letting them in. I think she said 260s for reading and 270s for math which I'm pretty sure is 99th percentile for both and in line with I've seen people list as their child's MAP scores in the past for both Blair and RM.

I do think luck did have something to do with her child getting in to Blair. I also think luck had something to do with my child getting in to Blair too even though DC also had 99th percentile MAP scores on both.

That was a different poster. You’re missing the point though. If a kid who got in to Blair also got in to multiple other programs it pretty much proves the point that they had a convincing application. So you can say the kid got in unfairly to all of the programs (unlikely) or you can acknowledge that their application convinced multiple selection committees that they were a strong candidate regardless of their MAP score.

You're not understanding the point.
The point is the child got in to most programs because the child had high MAP scores. Full stop. Those scores are outlier scores/top scores in most programs other than Blair.
There was one lucky call and the lucky call was Blair.

What scores? She hasn’t shared his scores, only that it was less than 300.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The kids are making a list?

Ew, gross.

But, given the hand-wringing on here, it's no wonder they are ranking themselves like this and are tied up in knots about this.

Depressing.

They put together a running list last night so that the kids who got in would know which of their friends were joining them. Not to compare or rank. PP implied that the same list now includes MAP scores but that may have been a misinterpretation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of the 800 kids that apply to Blair it's a safe bet that half of them have a 4.0 and are in the 99% nationally on their MAP-M and if that's true, which isn't all that implausible, it would be difficult to differentiate between those 400 applicants. At that point it's even kind of a crap shoot.

+1
You take the top top kids with the 300+ scores and you rule out the ones with the lowest scores and no clear STEM interest but you're still left with a massive group of overachievers and not a lot of data points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped by Dr Li

Good Essays = They probably used an essay consultant

All around performance = Their parents had the luxury of time and money to ferry them to sports or music.

Hence all advanced programs should only have student ID put into a lottery and numbers pulled out like Powerball.

Could the kids have worked hard or just be smart??? Are you kidding!!! That could never happen.

But this is true of white kids as well, right?

High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped at home

Good Essays = Proof-read and edited by a highly educated native English speaking parent

All around performance = Parents with time and energy to drive to travel soccer, volunteer opportunities, etc.

Hush. Get with the program. All Magnet acceptance posts on DCUM are for Asian bashing. You should not be saying "But others could have this advantage too"

LOL. I'm the PP and I'm writing as a white parent whose child was admitted to their preferred program(s). I fully acknowledge the ways in which my child's privilege is part of the equation here. In my case, it's not income (we're genuinely middle class, not just DCUM middle class), and it's not paid test prep, but it's pretty clear that my child's extracurriculars were a big part of their successful package. Those extracurriculars are extremely time consuming, and require one parent to either have a flexible work schedule or to be a SAHP.

There's nothing wrong with admitting that privilege is in the mix here. I can't undo the years that I spend driving my kid to their activity, and they have worked incredibly hard to get to the level that they have. It demonstrates something about them, for sure. But it would not have been possible without some specific circumstances at home.

Correct. And the choices you made (or had the ability to make) and priorities you had for your kid coupled with their interests. That is why I get particularly peeved when DCUM always characterizes Asians as not-intelligent robots coming through the Dr Li factory.

signed - An immigrant whose kid did not go to prep classes and got admitted to 7 Magnet programs.

DP I agree that characterization is unfair and racist. But I also think it appears in reaction to claims that Asian students are discriminated against by the selection committees, when there is absolutely no evidence to support this and overwhelming evidence that they are in fact over represented.

PP- My problem is there should be no concept of representation or over representation for these admissions. May the best kids get selected, whatever the criteria is. There should not be a "Your race is 13% of the population, so the 14th student who gets admitted in a 100 seat program means you are over-represented"

Look, I absolutely understand your frustration. And this is for anyone thinking kids like mine shouldn't have been chosen:
My kid is one of those "surprises" for Blair and I'm going to tell you how we approached application and perhaps it might help you see it in a different view. Why the committee chose them.
My kid knew they did not have the top map scores. They love math but science is their passion and that includes computer science too.
I don't want to identify myself or my child but because of my job, I approached the application as a job application. If a candidate doesn't have the top education or experience I listed on the job post, what do I want to see on the resume that could make me think yes, this is the IT guy I want.
So, in the award section, they listed awards or achievements strictly outside of school that showed discipline and hard work.
In the hobbies, they put one instrument (not a common one) one sports that takes discipline. One artistic hobby, two leasure ones and 2 that shows an interest in math science and computer science at home.
In the volunteer section, two that have nothing to do with SSL hours.
Their essay was written in their own voice, not very polished and rather short. They demonstrated a lifelong passion for science and computer science and strong work ethic as well as loving to collaborate with peers that they can learn from. Basically selling their soft skills as a way to offset a lower map score than others.
They were accepted into all of their choices so it means that different committees found their application compelling.
Remember that the map scores are only ONE criteria, the first one mentioned is a strong demonstrated interest in math science and computer science. They did not focus on math on the application but on all 3 subjects.
Again, I'm sorry. It feels unfair when the kid obviously worked very hard but that doesn't mean my kid deserves it less. My kid wants to be a scientist and they are doing stellar in science. Cogat was 99 percentile in 5th grade. They're a good fit for the magnet. Again I'm sorry.

And, you think other families did not do that too?

Well, if they didn't get admitted, they must've not done it as well.

Or luck was in your favor and not theirs. My kid got into Blair for stem but we recognize that luck plays a big role.

Do you really think that kid who got into all four or five programs they applied to (or more) just got “lucky” that multiple different selection committees saw merit in their application? Or if it more likely that they actually had a convincing application, one that was more convincing than those that are not admitted?

Most people upset on this thread are talking about Blair admissions and Blair admissions only.

Kids that get into Blair and RM will also easily get into the other programs as their test scores have to be pretty decent to get into both so we're not really talking about many selection committees taking a kid with lower scores and letting them in. I think she said 260s for reading and 270s for math which I'm pretty sure is 99th percentile for both and in line with I've seen people list as their child's MAP scores in the past for both Blair and RM.

I do think luck did have something to do with her child getting in to Blair. I also think luck had something to do with my child getting in to Blair too even though DC also had 99th percentile MAP scores on both.

That was a different poster. You’re missing the point though. If a kid who got in to Blair also got in to multiple other programs it pretty much proves the point that they had a convincing application. So you can say the kid got in unfairly to all of the programs (unlikely) or you can acknowledge that their application convinced multiple selection committees that they were a strong candidate regardless of their MAP score.

You're not understanding the point.
The point is the child got in to most programs because the child had high MAP scores. Full stop. Those scores are outlier scores/top scores in most programs other than Blair.
There was one lucky call and the lucky call was Blair.

What scores? She hasn’t shared his scores, only that it was less than 300.

She said 260s R and 270s M. If it wasn't her it was another poster bragging about their child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped by Dr Li

Good Essays = They probably used an essay consultant

All around performance = Their parents had the luxury of time and money to ferry them to sports or music.

Hence all advanced programs should only have student ID put into a lottery and numbers pulled out like Powerball.

Could the kids have worked hard or just be smart??? Are you kidding!!! That could never happen.

But this is true of white kids as well, right?

High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped at home

Good Essays = Proof-read and edited by a highly educated native English speaking parent

All around performance = Parents with time and energy to drive to travel soccer, volunteer opportunities, etc.

Hush. Get with the program. All Magnet acceptance posts on DCUM are for Asian bashing. You should not be saying "But others could have this advantage too"

LOL. I'm the PP and I'm writing as a white parent whose child was admitted to their preferred program(s). I fully acknowledge the ways in which my child's privilege is part of the equation here. In my case, it's not income (we're genuinely middle class, not just DCUM middle class), and it's not paid test prep, but it's pretty clear that my child's extracurriculars were a big part of their successful package. Those extracurriculars are extremely time consuming, and require one parent to either have a flexible work schedule or to be a SAHP.

There's nothing wrong with admitting that privilege is in the mix here. I can't undo the years that I spend driving my kid to their activity, and they have worked incredibly hard to get to the level that they have. It demonstrates something about them, for sure. But it would not have been possible without some specific circumstances at home.

Correct. And the choices you made (or had the ability to make) and priorities you had for your kid coupled with their interests. That is why I get particularly peeved when DCUM always characterizes Asians as not-intelligent robots coming through the Dr Li factory.

signed - An immigrant whose kid did not go to prep classes and got admitted to 7 Magnet programs.

DP I agree that characterization is unfair and racist. But I also think it appears in reaction to claims that Asian students are discriminated against by the selection committees, when there is absolutely no evidence to support this and overwhelming evidence that they are in fact over represented.

PP- My problem is there should be no concept of representation or over representation for these admissions. May the best kids get selected, whatever the criteria is. There should not be a "Your race is 13% of the population, so the 14th student who gets admitted in a 100 seat program means you are over-represented"

Look, I absolutely understand your frustration. And this is for anyone thinking kids like mine shouldn't have been chosen:
My kid is one of those "surprises" for Blair and I'm going to tell you how we approached application and perhaps it might help you see it in a different view. Why the committee chose them.
My kid knew they did not have the top map scores. They love math but science is their passion and that includes computer science too.
I don't want to identify myself or my child but because of my job, I approached the application as a job application. If a candidate doesn't have the top education or experience I listed on the job post, what do I want to see on the resume that could make me think yes, this is the IT guy I want.
So, in the award section, they listed awards or achievements strictly outside of school that showed discipline and hard work.
In the hobbies, they put one instrument (not a common one) one sports that takes discipline. One artistic hobby, two leasure ones and 2 that shows an interest in math science and computer science at home.
In the volunteer section, two that have nothing to do with SSL hours.
Their essay was written in their own voice, not very polished and rather short. They demonstrated a lifelong passion for science and computer science and strong work ethic as well as loving to collaborate with peers that they can learn from. Basically selling their soft skills as a way to offset a lower map score than others.
They were accepted into all of their choices so it means that different committees found their application compelling.
Remember that the map scores are only ONE criteria, the first one mentioned is a strong demonstrated interest in math science and computer science. They did not focus on math on the application but on all 3 subjects.
Again, I'm sorry. It feels unfair when the kid obviously worked very hard but that doesn't mean my kid deserves it less. My kid wants to be a scientist and they are doing stellar in science. Cogat was 99 percentile in 5th grade. They're a good fit for the magnet. Again I'm sorry.

And, you think other families did not do that too?

Well, if they didn't get admitted, they must've not done it as well.

Or, things like race and gender have a role to play as well as other committee bias.

My kid has all A's, very high MAP, two strong extracurricular activities that are prestigious, Algebra 2 for 8th, and two computer science classes. What more should a child have?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:270 is low for the TPMS students admitted, but it's not low overall. People have posted the mean for admitted students to Blair is in the 270s for past years.

Reiterating the point that it may not be school blind or race blind. Gender blind it definitely isn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped by Dr Li

Good Essays = They probably used an essay consultant

All around performance = Their parents had the luxury of time and money to ferry them to sports or music.

Hence all advanced programs should only have student ID put into a lottery and numbers pulled out like Powerball.

Could the kids have worked hard or just be smart??? Are you kidding!!! That could never happen.

But this is true of white kids as well, right?

High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped at home

Good Essays = Proof-read and edited by a highly educated native English speaking parent

All around performance = Parents with time and energy to drive to travel soccer, volunteer opportunities, etc.

Hush. Get with the program. All Magnet acceptance posts on DCUM are for Asian bashing. You should not be saying "But others could have this advantage too"

LOL. I'm the PP and I'm writing as a white parent whose child was admitted to their preferred program(s). I fully acknowledge the ways in which my child's privilege is part of the equation here. In my case, it's not income (we're genuinely middle class, not just DCUM middle class), and it's not paid test prep, but it's pretty clear that my child's extracurriculars were a big part of their successful package. Those extracurriculars are extremely time consuming, and require one parent to either have a flexible work schedule or to be a SAHP.

There's nothing wrong with admitting that privilege is in the mix here. I can't undo the years that I spend driving my kid to their activity, and they have worked incredibly hard to get to the level that they have. It demonstrates something about them, for sure. But it would not have been possible without some specific circumstances at home.

Correct. And the choices you made (or had the ability to make) and priorities you had for your kid coupled with their interests. That is why I get particularly peeved when DCUM always characterizes Asians as not-intelligent robots coming through the Dr Li factory.

signed - An immigrant whose kid did not go to prep classes and got admitted to 7 Magnet programs.

DP I agree that characterization is unfair and racist. But I also think it appears in reaction to claims that Asian students are discriminated against by the selection committees, when there is absolutely no evidence to support this and overwhelming evidence that they are in fact over represented.

PP- My problem is there should be no concept of representation or over representation for these admissions. May the best kids get selected, whatever the criteria is. There should not be a "Your race is 13% of the population, so the 14th student who gets admitted in a 100 seat program means you are over-represented"

Look, I absolutely understand your frustration. And this is for anyone thinking kids like mine shouldn't have been chosen:
My kid is one of those "surprises" for Blair and I'm going to tell you how we approached application and perhaps it might help you see it in a different view. Why the committee chose them.
My kid knew they did not have the top map scores. They love math but science is their passion and that includes computer science too.
I don't want to identify myself or my child but because of my job, I approached the application as a job application. If a candidate doesn't have the top education or experience I listed on the job post, what do I want to see on the resume that could make me think yes, this is the IT guy I want.
So, in the award section, they listed awards or achievements strictly outside of school that showed discipline and hard work.
In the hobbies, they put one instrument (not a common one) one sports that takes discipline. One artistic hobby, two leasure ones and 2 that shows an interest in math science and computer science at home.
In the volunteer section, two that have nothing to do with SSL hours.
Their essay was written in their own voice, not very polished and rather short. They demonstrated a lifelong passion for science and computer science and strong work ethic as well as loving to collaborate with peers that they can learn from. Basically selling their soft skills as a way to offset a lower map score than others.
They were accepted into all of their choices so it means that different committees found their application compelling.
Remember that the map scores are only ONE criteria, the first one mentioned is a strong demonstrated interest in math science and computer science. They did not focus on math on the application but on all 3 subjects.
Again, I'm sorry. It feels unfair when the kid obviously worked very hard but that doesn't mean my kid deserves it less. My kid wants to be a scientist and they are doing stellar in science. Cogat was 99 percentile in 5th grade. They're a good fit for the magnet. Again I'm sorry.

And, you think other families did not do that too?

Well, if they didn't get admitted, they must've not done it as well.

Or luck was in your favor and not theirs. My kid got into Blair for stem but we recognize that luck plays a big role.

Do you really think that kid who got into all four or five programs they applied to (or more) just got “lucky” that multiple different selection committees saw merit in their application? Or if it more likely that they actually had a convincing application, one that was more convincing than those that are not admitted?

Most people upset on this thread are talking about Blair admissions and Blair admissions only.

Kids that get into Blair and RM will also easily get into the other programs as their test scores have to be pretty decent to get into both so we're not really talking about many selection committees taking a kid with lower scores and letting them in. I think she said 260s for reading and 270s for math which I'm pretty sure is 99th percentile for both and in line with I've seen people list as their child's MAP scores in the past for both Blair and RM.

I do think luck did have something to do with her child getting in to Blair. I also think luck had something to do with my child getting in to Blair too even though DC also had 99th percentile MAP scores on both.

That was a different poster. You’re missing the point though. If a kid who got in to Blair also got in to multiple other programs it pretty much proves the point that they had a convincing application. So you can say the kid got in unfairly to all of the programs (unlikely) or you can acknowledge that their application convinced multiple selection committees that they were a strong candidate regardless of their MAP score.

You're not understanding the point.
The point is the child got in to most programs because the child had high MAP scores. Full stop. Those scores are outlier scores/top scores in most programs other than Blair.
There was one lucky call and the lucky call was Blair.

What scores? She hasn’t shared his scores, only that it was less than 300.

She said 260s R and 270s M. If it wasn't her it was another poster bragging about their child.

No she didn’t. I already told you that was a different poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped by Dr Li

Good Essays = They probably used an essay consultant

All around performance = Their parents had the luxury of time and money to ferry them to sports or music.

Hence all advanced programs should only have student ID put into a lottery and numbers pulled out like Powerball.

Could the kids have worked hard or just be smart??? Are you kidding!!! That could never happen.

But this is true of white kids as well, right?

High Academic performance in COGAT or MAP = Prepped at home

Good Essays = Proof-read and edited by a highly educated native English speaking parent

All around performance = Parents with time and energy to drive to travel soccer, volunteer opportunities, etc.

Hush. Get with the program. All Magnet acceptance posts on DCUM are for Asian bashing. You should not be saying "But others could have this advantage too"

LOL. I'm the PP and I'm writing as a white parent whose child was admitted to their preferred program(s). I fully acknowledge the ways in which my child's privilege is part of the equation here. In my case, it's not income (we're genuinely middle class, not just DCUM middle class), and it's not paid test prep, but it's pretty clear that my child's extracurriculars were a big part of their successful package. Those extracurriculars are extremely time consuming, and require one parent to either have a flexible work schedule or to be a SAHP.

There's nothing wrong with admitting that privilege is in the mix here. I can't undo the years that I spend driving my kid to their activity, and they have worked incredibly hard to get to the level that they have. It demonstrates something about them, for sure. But it would not have been possible without some specific circumstances at home.

Correct. And the choices you made (or had the ability to make) and priorities you had for your kid coupled with their interests. That is why I get particularly peeved when DCUM always characterizes Asians as not-intelligent robots coming through the Dr Li factory.

signed - An immigrant whose kid did not go to prep classes and got admitted to 7 Magnet programs.

DP I agree that characterization is unfair and racist. But I also think it appears in reaction to claims that Asian students are discriminated against by the selection committees, when there is absolutely no evidence to support this and overwhelming evidence that they are in fact over represented.

PP- My problem is there should be no concept of representation or over representation for these admissions. May the best kids get selected, whatever the criteria is. There should not be a "Your race is 13% of the population, so the 14th student who gets admitted in a 100 seat program means you are over-represented"

Look, I absolutely understand your frustration. And this is for anyone thinking kids like mine shouldn't have been chosen:
My kid is one of those "surprises" for Blair and I'm going to tell you how we approached application and perhaps it might help you see it in a different view. Why the committee chose them.
My kid knew they did not have the top map scores. They love math but science is their passion and that includes computer science too.
I don't want to identify myself or my child but because of my job, I approached the application as a job application. If a candidate doesn't have the top education or experience I listed on the job post, what do I want to see on the resume that could make me think yes, this is the IT guy I want.
So, in the award section, they listed awards or achievements strictly outside of school that showed discipline and hard work.
In the hobbies, they put one instrument (not a common one) one sports that takes discipline. One artistic hobby, two leasure ones and 2 that shows an interest in math science and computer science at home.
In the volunteer section, two that have nothing to do with SSL hours.
Their essay was written in their own voice, not very polished and rather short. They demonstrated a lifelong passion for science and computer science and strong work ethic as well as loving to collaborate with peers that they can learn from. Basically selling their soft skills as a way to offset a lower map score than others.
They were accepted into all of their choices so it means that different committees found their application compelling.
Remember that the map scores are only ONE criteria, the first one mentioned is a strong demonstrated interest in math science and computer science. They did not focus on math on the application but on all 3 subjects.
Again, I'm sorry. It feels unfair when the kid obviously worked very hard but that doesn't mean my kid deserves it less. My kid wants to be a scientist and they are doing stellar in science. Cogat was 99 percentile in 5th grade. They're a good fit for the magnet. Again I'm sorry.

And, you think other families did not do that too?

Well, if they didn't get admitted, they must've not done it as well.

Or luck was in your favor and not theirs. My kid got into Blair for stem but we recognize that luck plays a big role.

Do you really think that kid who got into all four or five programs they applied to (or more) just got “lucky” that multiple different selection committees saw merit in their application? Or if it more likely that they actually had a convincing application, one that was more convincing than those that are not admitted?

Most people upset on this thread are talking about Blair admissions and Blair admissions only.

Kids that get into Blair and RM will also easily get into the other programs as their test scores have to be pretty decent to get into both so we're not really talking about many selection committees taking a kid with lower scores and letting them in. I think she said 260s for reading and 270s for math which I'm pretty sure is 99th percentile for both and in line with I've seen people list as their child's MAP scores in the past for both Blair and RM.

I do think luck did have something to do with her child getting in to Blair. I also think luck had something to do with my child getting in to Blair too even though DC also had 99th percentile MAP scores on both.

That was a different poster. You’re missing the point though. If a kid who got in to Blair also got in to multiple other programs it pretty much proves the point that they had a convincing application. So you can say the kid got in unfairly to all of the programs (unlikely) or you can acknowledge that their application convinced multiple selection committees that they were a strong candidate regardless of their MAP score.

You're not understanding the point.
The point is the child got in to most programs because the child had high MAP scores. Full stop. Those scores are outlier scores/top scores in most programs other than Blair.
There was one lucky call and the lucky call was Blair.

What scores? She hasn’t shared his scores, only that it was less than 300.

She said 260s R and 270s M. If it wasn't her it was another poster bragging about their child.

It’s not about bragging, it’s about providing reference points instead of just making shit up like seems to be the MO on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The kids are making a list?

Ew, gross.

But, given the hand-wringing on here, it's no wonder they are ranking themselves like this and are tied up in knots about this.

Depressing.

Actually it is the other way. They made these lists first. Parental hand wringing came later mainly because of sad kids.