Magnet Middle School Thread: MAP scores and results

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it seems that some kids with lower scores ‘won’ the lottery and that’s bad luck for the high scoring and also deserving kids. I don’t understand how high scorers were not included in the pool when there are clearly kids with lower (still very good) scores in there.

A much simpler way to doing it would have been to select the top scorers, taking into account previous years of MAP scores to account for the pandemic.

True, although the scores may not be the perfect predictor for success in magnet programs.

Honestly, the magnet middle school program could double or triple their seating and not dilute their excellence. Due to seat shortages, it's more selective than either high school or elementary school magnets.

No selection method is perfect, but I would rather have a strictly academic selection method than any other. This isn't so much for the children who get in since I know they'll do well (see above). It's to allow the outliers and higher-scorers to avoid their home school. A bright kid who is on the cusp might be expected to do well at either school, but for a kid who consistently scores higher than anyone else - how can anyone think they'd be fine in their home school? Weren't magnets made for just these children?

I agree but you have to have the top kids there or else it's pointless. At TPMS there's a core group of a dozen kids in each grade who are exceptional. Other kids go there to be with these kids. If they are no longer there then what?

And this top dozen group is uniquely determined by the top dozen MAP scores? I am not trying to be snarky, just curious.

No but in the absence of other data they could have taken the top 10-20 students in the county and then did lottery for the rest. Chances are they would have caught some of these kids. The kids we know who were admitted to TPMS had MAP scores that were higher than reported here in addition to high Cogat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You guys are going to freak the *#% out, but my DD is in the high-average 89% for math and the 96% for reading on recent MAPS, all As, in the enriched math etc in her regular ES and she was placed in the lottery pool for both. Did not get placed in either. Do you think they took cohort into account this year? Congrats on all your 99% everything kiddos! But sad about not getting a chance for my DD to go to Eastern. I love that program so much. TP would not have been a good fit... but I admit to feeling good she was in the pool. Those of you with 99-ers are probably (justifiably?) angry that she was, I admit.

I think some parents with kids who had higher scores are justifiably upset about the lack of transparency and the fact it obviously wasn't a straight lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it seems that some kids with lower scores ‘won’ the lottery and that’s bad luck for the high scoring and also deserving kids. I don’t understand how high scorers were not included in the pool when there are clearly kids with lower (still very good) scores in there.

A much simpler way to doing it would have been to select the top scorers, taking into account previous years of MAP scores to account for the pandemic.

True, although the scores may not be the perfect predictor for success in magnet programs.

Honestly, the magnet middle school program could double or triple their seating and not dilute their excellence. Due to seat shortages, it's more selective than either high school or elementary school magnets.

No selection method is perfect, but I would rather have a strictly academic selection method than any other. This isn't so much for the children who get in since I know they'll do well (see above). It's to allow the outliers and higher-scorers to avoid their home school. A bright kid who is on the cusp might be expected to do well at either school, but for a kid who consistently scores higher than anyone else - how can anyone think they'd be fine in their home school? Weren't magnets made for just these children?

I agree but you have to have the top kids there or else it's pointless. At TPMS there's a core group of a dozen kids in each grade who are exceptional. Other kids go there to be with these kids. If they are no longer there then what?

They are top kids. I mean they're all in the top 10%.

You don't understand. There is top 10%, or even 1%, and then there are these handful of kids.

If you read this thread and correlate the scores to acceptance, it's clear kids who are in the top 10% got in whereas some in the top 0.1% didn't. This is a lottery. The only part that involved academic selection was selection for the pool. Beyond that it was just a random draw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fall 2020 MAP: 244 math 240 reading
Report card: straight A's
School: CES Chevy Chase

Lottery pool status: in pool for Eastern and Takoma Park

Magnet status: selected for TPMS but not Eastern

Girl?
There were kids with 270+ MAP last year not selected.

No Boy but it's a lottery so it's not about their score beyond making the pool.

Congratulations!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it seems that some kids with lower scores ‘won’ the lottery and that’s bad luck for the high scoring and also deserving kids. I don’t understand how high scorers were not included in the pool when there are clearly kids with lower (still very good) scores in there.

A much simpler way to doing it would have been to select the top scorers, taking into account previous years of MAP scores to account for the pandemic.

True, although the scores may not be the perfect predictor for success in magnet programs.

Honestly, the magnet middle school program could double or triple their seating and not dilute their excellence. Due to seat shortages, it's more selective than either high school or elementary school magnets.

No selection method is perfect, but I would rather have a strictly academic selection method than any other. This isn't so much for the children who get in since I know they'll do well (see above). It's to allow the outliers and higher-scorers to avoid their home school. A bright kid who is on the cusp might be expected to do well at either school, but for a kid who consistently scores higher than anyone else - how can anyone think they'd be fine in their home school? Weren't magnets made for just these children?

I agree but you have to have the top kids there or else it's pointless. At TPMS there's a core group of a dozen kids in each grade who are exceptional. Other kids go there to be with these kids. If they are no longer there then what?

They are top kids. I mean they're all in the top 10%.

You don't understand. There is top 10%, or even 1%, and then there are these handful of kids.

If you read this thread and correlate the scores to acceptance, it's clear kids who are in the top 10% got in whereas some in the top 0.1% didn't. This is a lottery. The only part that involved academic selection was selection for the pool. Beyond that it was just a random draw.

If you read the thread more closely you will see that some kids who had higher scores weren't in the pool while others with lower scores were in the pool.
This is what people are upset about. That and the fact that the pool seemed pretty big based on some of the scores. So why weren't some of these 99th percentile kids in it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are going to freak the *#% out, but my DD is in the high-average 89% for math and the 96% for reading on recent MAPS, all As, in the enriched math etc in her regular ES and she was placed in the lottery pool for both. Did not get placed in either. Do you think they took cohort into account this year? Congrats on all your 99% everything kiddos! But sad about not getting a chance for my DD to go to Eastern. I love that program so much. TP would not have been a good fit... but I admit to feeling good she was in the pool. Those of you with 99-ers are probably (justifiably?) angry that she was, I admit.

I think some parents with kids who had higher scores are justifiably upset about the lack of transparency and the fact it obviously wasn't a straight lottery.

Why do you say it OBVIOUSLY wasn't a straight lottery? The proof that it was a straight lottery appears to be that kids with lower scores from high income areas were admitted ahead of kids with higher scores from the same areas, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think some parents with kids who had higher scores are justifiably upset about the lack of transparency and the fact it obviously wasn't a straight lottery.

MCPS will never release the recipe for the secret sauce. If they did, too many parents would try to game it.

[Anonymous]

Maybe the answer is simpler. That MAP scores were one of the criteria but not always the deciding criteria. Maybe something else, like teacher recommendations, etc is weighted more heavily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are going to freak the *#% out, but my DD is in the high-average 89% for math and the 96% for reading on recent MAPS, all As, in the enriched math etc in her regular ES and she was placed in the lottery pool for both. Did not get placed in either. Do you think they took cohort into account this year? Congrats on all your 99% everything kiddos! But sad about not getting a chance for my DD to go to Eastern. I love that program so much. TP would not have been a good fit... but I admit to feeling good she was in the pool. Those of you with 99-ers are probably (justifiably?) angry that she was, I admit.

I think some parents with kids who had higher scores are justifiably upset about the lack of transparency and the fact it obviously wasn't a straight lottery.

Why do you say it OBVIOUSLY wasn't a straight lottery? The proof that it was a straight lottery appears to be that kids with lower scores from high income areas were admitted ahead of kids with higher scores from the same areas, right?

This seems like a rhetorical question but I'll bite. If it were a straight and honest lottery you would see clear cut offs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some parents with kids who had higher scores are justifiably upset about the lack of transparency and the fact it obviously wasn't a straight lottery.

MCPS will never release the recipe for the secret sauce. If they did, too many parents would try to game it.

You've posted this before.
They are a public entity. They are required to reveal this stuff. Can someone request this under the information act?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe the answer is simpler. That MAP scores were one of the criteria but not always the deciding criteria. Maybe something else, like teacher recommendations, etc is weighted more heavily.

Teacher recs do not count.

Stated criteria: scores, grades, FARMS, IEP, ESOL. Perhaps gender, perhaps balancing schools?

[Anonymous]

Fall Map 98% math 94% reading
CES
Straight A
3rd grade cogat 99%
High FARMS school but not our family, male,
Not in the lottery pool for either.

[Anonymous]

Most kids who got invited haven't got their letter yet? Or parents whose kids got selected are not here to vent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most kids who got invited haven't got their letter yet? Or parents whose kids got selected are not here to vent.

It’s going to take a few days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it seems that some kids with lower scores ‘won’ the lottery and that’s bad luck for the high scoring and also deserving kids. I don’t understand how high scorers were not included in the pool when there are clearly kids with lower (still very good) scores in there.

A much simpler way to doing it would have been to select the top scorers, taking into account previous years of MAP scores to account for the pandemic.

True, although the scores may not be the perfect predictor for success in magnet programs.

Honestly, the magnet middle school program could double or triple their seating and not dilute their excellence. Due to seat shortages, it's more selective than either high school or elementary school magnets.

No selection method is perfect, but I would rather have a strictly academic selection method than any other. This isn't so much for the children who get in since I know they'll do well (see above). It's to allow the outliers and higher-scorers to avoid their home school. A bright kid who is on the cusp might be expected to do well at either school, but for a kid who consistently scores higher than anyone else - how can anyone think they'd be fine in their home school? Weren't magnets made for just these children?

I agree but you have to have the top kids there or else it's pointless. At TPMS there's a core group of a dozen kids in each grade who are exceptional. Other kids go there to be with these kids. If they are no longer there then what?

And this top dozen group is uniquely determined by the top dozen MAP scores? I am not trying to be snarky, just curious.

DC's map score is 30 points over the 99% and in the high 270s. The difference in their score and a 99% is the same as that of an 70% and a 99%. However, they did not make the cut. They had straight A's. They are in the CES. They had 99% cog-at when they took it in 3rd and 5's on both PARCs. This is a lottery. Their scores were great but it didn't matter in the end.