MCPS to ban redshirting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I doubt it will happen because people will lose their minds over it. They might try to pass the policy, but it will never stick. In DC it wound up being a handful of parents throwing a fit. In MoCo it would be thousands of parents. And not even just parents who redshirt -- a lot of MoCo families believe redshirting should be permitted because they think it improves the maturity of K cohorts overall. In some elementary schools, it's a huge part of the culture of the school.

What does this even mean? Is there an MCPS elementary school where parents are consciously redshirting their kids as a group?

W school cluster parents think it will give their kid an advantage.
5 year olds go to kindergarten, as they should, OP.

Redshirting is not common at all at our W cluster elementary. Much more common for summer birthday kids to start on time (as they should).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:About time. Age norm the MAP scores while you are at it.

+1000 - would love to see this. At least Cogat has an age norm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are at a B-CC feeder and the summer boys tend to redshirt. It’s pretty common.

So are these redshirted boys not able to play sports their senior year in high school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About time. Age norm the MAP scores while you are at it.

MAP scores have always been age-normed.
This is why from a point of view of testing, red-shirted kids don't necessarily have an academic advantage.

No MAP is not age-normed. Not for MCPS anyway. If you look at the cogat test reports it shows the percentile of your child considering the scores for children of X number of years and months. For MAP testing, it just shows your child as benchmarked against the district and grade level means.

+1 This annoyed me. My kid is one of the youngest in their class, and CES slots are assigned solely based on MAP scores, and not COGAT scores which control for age.

They are not assigned based on MAP scores. It’s not like those who score well have an especially good chance of getting in. They throw anyone in the 85th oercentile (locally normed) into a lottery.

It’s not a good system, and it would be improved by using CogAt, but the real problem is that the lottery threshold is too low.

No one knows what the cutoff thresholds are for CES-they're not disclosed, but in low-FARMs schools, it's rumored to be in the low to mid-90s, not 85%. And yes, that can be a meaningful gap to bridge when you have a young student, and a kid who is 18 months older...and assess them as if they're exactly the same.

It’s always 85th oercentile locally normed — it is the National oercentile that shifts.

Can you cite a source for that? I know a kid with a low 90s MAP-R who wasn't in the CES lottery pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are at a B-CC feeder and the summer boys tend to redshirt. It’s pretty common.

So are these redshirted boys not able to play sports their senior year in high school?

Depends on if they turn 19 in the summer. They probably won't. In my old district kids were starting kindergarten at like age 6 so the 1 year redshirt was making them 19 year old seniors. I forgot that they would be starting at like 5 years old here and it wouldn't make a huge difference.

Now if a kid redshirts and then repeats the 3rd grade with the new policy on 3rd grade retention for not being able to read, it's a whole different story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are at a B-CC feeder and the summer boys tend to redshirt. It’s pretty common.

So are these redshirted boys not able to play sports their senior year in high school?

No idea, as we are not there yet. But I don’t think they are doing it for sports — I think it is a reaction to feeling there is too much sitting and unrealistic expectations for K. That’s what these parents told
Me when we were in K, at least!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About time. Age norm the MAP scores while you are at it.

MAP scores have always been age-normed.
This is why from a point of view of testing, red-shirted kids don't necessarily have an academic advantage.

No MAP is not age-normed. Not for MCPS anyway. If you look at the cogat test reports it shows the percentile of your child considering the scores for children of X number of years and months. For MAP testing, it just shows your child as benchmarked against the district and grade level means.

+1 This annoyed me. My kid is one of the youngest in their class, and CES slots are assigned solely based on MAP scores, and not COGAT scores which control for age.

They are not assigned based on MAP scores. It’s not like those who score well have an especially good chance of getting in. They throw anyone in the 85th oercentile (locally normed) into a lottery.

It’s not a good system, and it would be improved by using CogAt, but the real problem is that the lottery threshold is too low.

No one knows what the cutoff thresholds are for CES-they're not disclosed, but in low-FARMs schools, it's rumored to be in the low to mid-90s, not 85%. And yes, that can be a meaningful gap to bridge when you have a young student, and a kid who is 18 months older...and assess them as if they're exactly the same.

It’s always 85th oercentile locally normed — it is the National oercentile that shifts.

Can you cite a source for that? I know a kid with a low 90s MAP-R who wasn't in the CES lottery pool.

Yes because he wasn’t 85th oercentile locally normed. So if he had 91% and the cutoff was 92% nationally, he was not in the top 15% of the kids in his school because in average his school did better than National
Kids did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About time. Age norm the MAP scores while you are at it.

MAP scores have always been age-normed.
This is why from a point of view of testing, red-shirted kids don't necessarily have an academic advantage.

No MAP is not age-normed. Not for MCPS anyway. If you look at the cogat test reports it shows the percentile of your child considering the scores for children of X number of years and months. For MAP testing, it just shows your child as benchmarked against the district and grade level means.

+1 This annoyed me. My kid is one of the youngest in their class, and CES slots are assigned solely based on MAP scores, and not COGAT scores which control for age.

They are not assigned based on MAP scores. It’s not like those who score well have an especially good chance of getting in. They throw anyone in the 85th oercentile (locally normed) into a lottery.

It’s not a good system, and it would be improved by using CogAt, but the real problem is that the lottery threshold is too low.

No one knows what the cutoff thresholds are for CES-they're not disclosed, but in low-FARMs schools, it's rumored to be in the low to mid-90s, not 85%. And yes, that can be a meaningful gap to bridge when you have a young student, and a kid who is 18 months older...and assess them as if they're exactly the same.

It’s always 85th oercentile locally normed — it is the National oercentile that shifts.

Can you cite a source for that? I know a kid with a low 90s MAP-R who wasn't in the CES lottery pool.

Yes because he wasn’t 85th oercentile locally normed. So if he had 91% and the cutoff was 92% nationally, he was not in the top 15% of the kids in his school because in average his school did better than National
Kids did.

Or I should add kid could have gotten a B in reading or writing.

Here is the source for the locally normed 85th percentile figure:

https://docs.google.com/document/u/2/d/1k0D-Z3uAc8ydu4P7gegUxkKMsV2_dDbbP-hnIB-oTjA/mobilebasic

See question 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are at a B-CC feeder and the summer boys tend to redshirt. It’s pretty common.

So are these redshirted boys not able to play sports their senior year in high school?

Depends on if they turn 19 in the summer. They probably won't. In my old district kids were starting kindergarten at like age 6 so the 1 year redshirt was making them 19 year old seniors. I forgot that they would be starting at like 5 years old here and it wouldn't make a huge difference.

Now if a kid redshirts and then repeats the 3rd grade with the new policy on 3rd grade retention for not being able to read, it's a whole different story.

I'm not sure I understand the argument- my baby was born first week of September. All the babies in her pace group were born within 2 weeks of her, some pre cut off and some after cut off. You think the ones with Aug 30th should be blocked from sports but not Sept 5th or they all should be blocked? My kid will turn 6 2 weeks into k

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About time. Age norm the MAP scores while you are at it.

MAP scores have always been age-normed.
This is why from a point of view of testing, red-shirted kids don't necessarily have an academic advantage.

No MAP is not age-normed. Not for MCPS anyway. If you look at the cogat test reports it shows the percentile of your child considering the scores for children of X number of years and months. For MAP testing, it just shows your child as benchmarked against the district and grade level means.

+1 This annoyed me. My kid is one of the youngest in their class, and CES slots are assigned solely based on MAP scores, and not COGAT scores which control for age.

They are not assigned based on MAP scores. It’s not like those who score well have an especially good chance of getting in. They throw anyone in the 85th oercentile (locally normed) into a lottery.

It’s not a good system, and it would be improved by using CogAt, but the real problem is that the lottery threshold is too low.

No one knows what the cutoff thresholds are for CES-they're not disclosed, but in low-FARMs schools, it's rumored to be in the low to mid-90s, not 85%. And yes, that can be a meaningful gap to bridge when you have a young student, and a kid who is 18 months older...and assess them as if they're exactly the same.

It’s always 85th oercentile locally normed — it is the National oercentile that shifts.

Can you cite a source for that? I know a kid with a low 90s MAP-R who wasn't in the CES lottery pool.

There was a document somewhere on MCPS website that showing the 85% local norm corresponding to 95% national percentile for low-SES schools, and 60% national percentile for high-SES schools. It also says if a kid has IEP/504 plan, the local norm threshold is lowered to 80% or something similar. I can't find the document right now, but my 4th grader's experience proved that. Their friends with 94% MAP-R wasn't qualify for entering the lottery pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC was definitely not ready for K at first access and might have been an issue in the classroom. Redshirting alleviated that ahead of time and guaranteed a better K year for everyone, including the other kids and their families. DC went on to be very successful and hasn't taken any advantages (or attention, or sports positions) away from anyone else.

You sound both privileged and oblivious. You were not in the classroom at all times or in any position to know what resources your child took up or took away from others. And the fact that he was "very successful" could be due to the fact that he was a year older than many other kids in his class who went through their schooling following the prescribed norms for entrance year.

We've necessarily kept close with teachers and staff to ensure we supported them, so yes, we do have a good sense _from them_ of what it took to keep DC on track (vs. how things would have been a year earlier). But success doesn't have to be competitive. DC needed that extra time in good part to make things easier for everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are at a B-CC feeder and the summer boys tend to redshirt. It’s pretty common.

So are these redshirted boys not able to play sports their senior year in high school?

Depends on if they turn 19 in the summer. They probably won't. In my old district kids were starting kindergarten at like age 6 so the 1 year redshirt was making them 19 year old seniors. I forgot that they would be starting at like 5 years old here and it wouldn't make a huge difference.

Now if a kid redshirts and then repeats the 3rd grade with the new policy on 3rd grade retention for not being able to read, it's a whole different story.

I'm not sure I understand the argument- my baby was born first week of September. All the babies in her pace group were born within 2 weeks of her, some pre cut off and some after cut off. You think the ones with Aug 30th should be blocked from sports but not Sept 5th or they all should be blocked? My kid will turn 6 2 weeks into k

I don’t. The county does. County policy is no student who turns 19 before august 30th is ineligible but a September 1st birthday is good to go

[Anonymous]

Sorry. In my car. Accidentally typed a double negative. 19 in August = ineligible 19 in September = eligible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are at a B-CC feeder and the summer boys tend to redshirt. It’s pretty common.

We are at BCC and this wasn’t our experience when our kids were in ES. Most sent on time. Anecdotally, the few summer boys who did get redshirted all left for small nurturing privates in upper ES or middle school. Redshirting obviously wasn’t enough of a solution to meeting their kids’ individual needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are at a B-CC feeder and the summer boys tend to redshirt. It’s pretty common.

So are these redshirted boys not able to play sports their senior year in high school?

Depends on if they turn 19 in the summer. They probably won't. In my old district kids were starting kindergarten at like age 6 so the 1 year redshirt was making them 19 year old seniors. I forgot that they would be starting at like 5 years old here and it wouldn't make a huge difference.

Now if a kid redshirts and then repeats the 3rd grade with the new policy on 3rd grade retention for not being able to read, it's a whole different story.

I'm not sure I understand the argument- my baby was born first week of September. All the babies in her pace group were born within 2 weeks of her, some pre cut off and some after cut off. You think the ones with Aug 30th should be blocked from sports but not Sept 5th or they all should be blocked? My kid will turn 6 2 weeks into k

I have a September birthday and started kindergarten in the 1980s when I was about to turn 6, ie I was redshirt.
I turned 18 about 2 weeks into my senior year. Your kid will be the same.