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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously we they screened the ENTIRE student popultion they found some really smart kids with parents who aren't obsessive about their kids' educations. I love that they removed the parent component! It means access for all, not just the savvy. I'm eager to see what it means for CES!

However, there is an obvious need to make sure the high achieving kids who didn't get into a special program are having their academic needs met, and, as I think we all know, that means clustering. This is good for kids and for teachers.

Agreed. People need to recognize that their white, UMC snowflake child isn't going to get a leg up just because they want snowflake to feel special 24/7. Equitable access to these programs is a *good* thing.

- a white UMC mom

White UMC mother here; DH and I are both educated professionals. DC got accepted to MS magnet this year and had they not had universal screening we wouldn't have even applied, because while we consider our child to be very smart, it wouldn't have crossed our mind to presume that our child would necessarily be head and shoulders above the rest. (We're from the Midwest, so maybe it's Midwestern humbleness and "Please-you-go-ahead-of-us-ness"at play here ). When DC got accepted and I saw the scores, I was surprised. So if our family--white and UMC and education-oriented--wouldn't have even bothered applying, undoubtedly there are many, many other families out there who have highly able children but benefit from universal screening and removing the need for parental savvy and parental aspirations.

Ockham's razor: the simplest explanation is usually the best explanation. They screened lots more people this year so not a surprise that the traditional results were different. This is exactly what universal testing was designed to accomplish--finding the best candidates who otherwise wouldn't have tried/known.

The problem is not universal testing - I think it is a good thing. The problem is rejecting students because they have a peer group in the home school, while not providing anything even remotely equivalent to what the magnet programs offer at their home school. That is the "new and improved" process for this year. (The icing on the cake is to tell the parents to "work with the principal for programming and grouping practices." http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/curriculum/specialprograms/middle/Frequently%20Asked%20Questions%20Eastern%20and%20Takoma%20Park%20Magnet%20ProgramsFINAL(1).pdf)

MCPS has a very bad track record of challenging advanced learners in their home schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the CES/CHG parents are so shocked. Only a subset of the most savvy parents had their kids tested for CES/CHG. And in the past that same small subset applied for magnets.

Now that CES/CHG and magnets testing is on ALL students, the classrooms are going to look different.

My 99%er didn't even get into her HOME SCHOOL magnet with dedicated slots (TPMS)!

now that more kids are being tested, are the schools going to start taking steps to accommodate the 99%ers who didn't get into the CES?

Those kids have been there, at their home schools, all along. It's just that nobody knew, because they didn't apply/weren't tested.

Do teachers have access to State test scores? I think administrators do, but use that info to SPLIT the advance kids, as opposed to cluster them, which is INSANE. In any case, I think the smart kids are all "known," but the only intervention is designed to help the low achieving kids, not the high achievers. Ouch.

Let me correct my statement: the only intervention is designed to help the low achieving kids, AT THE EXPENSE OF the high achievers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously we they screened the ENTIRE student popultion they found some really smart kids with parents who aren't obsessive about their kids' educations. I love that they removed the parent component! It means access for all, not just the savvy. I'm eager to see what it means for CES!

However, there is an obvious need to make sure the high achieving kids who didn't get into a special program are having their academic needs met, and, as I think we all know, that means clustering. This is good for kids and for teachers.

Agreed. People need to recognize that their white, UMC snowflake child isn't going to get a leg up just because they want snowflake to feel special 24/7. Equitable access to these programs is a *good* thing.

- a white UMC mom

White UMC mother here; DH and I are both educated professionals. DC got accepted to MS magnet this year and had they not had universal screening we wouldn't have even applied, because while we consider our child to be very smart, it wouldn't have crossed our mind to presume that our child would necessarily be head and shoulders above the rest. (We're from the Midwest, so maybe it's Midwestern humbleness and "Please-you-go-ahead-of-us-ness"at play here ). When DC got accepted and I saw the scores, I was surprised. So if our family--white and UMC and education-oriented--wouldn't have even bothered applying, undoubtedly there are many, many other families out there who have highly able children but benefit from universal screening and removing the need for parental savvy and parental aspirations.

Ockham's razor: the simplest explanation is usually the best explanation. They screened lots more people this year so not a surprise that the traditional results were different. This is exactly what universal testing was designed to accomplish--finding the best candidates who otherwise wouldn't have tried/known.

This rings true. I could easily have been a parent who didn't know to seek out these programs, but there was an older child on our street who went to an HGC (at the time). That lead us to apply and get in, this snowballed among neighbors, I'd say our block was over represented. And, probably no shortage of kids a couple streets over who never applied. It was word of mouth that sparked interest even though everyone received the mailings. As far as the poster who's saying their HGC is now under represented for the first time this year, it's probably that so many more students from their home ES were screened and found to be comparable to HGC peers. It's not necessarily kids from elsewhere in the county that received the slots.

Congratulations to everyone who received good news, screening more kids is important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or the teacher was genuinely angry on behalf of her kids and frustrated by the fact that she can count on very few of the kids she dedicates countless hours to getting into MS magnets from now on. She's human for heaven's sakes.

And magnet kids are easy to discuss these things with, so she did. I agree, she's human and was frustrated, and wanted to commisserate with the kids.

I mean, is the GOAL of the HGC teacher to get kids into the magnet? Or is the goal of the HGC teacher to enrich and deepen the education of the children in her care? If the latter, I'm not sure I understand why she would be so frustrated as to break down significant professional boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously we they screened the ENTIRE student popultion they found some really smart kids with parents who aren't obsessive about their kids' educations. I love that they removed the parent component! It means access for all, not just the savvy. I'm eager to see what it means for CES!

However, there is an obvious need to make sure the high achieving kids who didn't get into a special program are having their academic needs met, and, as I think we all know, that means clustering. This is good for kids and for teachers.

Agreed. People need to recognize that their white, UMC snowflake child isn't going to get a leg up just because they want snowflake to feel special 24/7. Equitable access to these programs is a *good* thing.

- a white UMC mom

White UMC mother here; DH and I are both educated professionals. DC got accepted to MS magnet this year and had they not had universal screening we wouldn't have even applied, because while we consider our child to be very smart, it wouldn't have crossed our mind to presume that our child would necessarily be head and shoulders above the rest. (We're from the Midwest, so maybe it's Midwestern humbleness and "Please-you-go-ahead-of-us-ness"at play here ). When DC got accepted and I saw the scores, I was surprised. So if our family--white and UMC and education-oriented--wouldn't have even bothered applying, undoubtedly there are many, many other families out there who have highly able children but benefit from universal screening and removing the need for parental savvy and parental aspirations.

Ockham's razor: the simplest explanation is usually the best explanation. They screened lots more people this year so not a surprise that the traditional results were different. This is exactly what universal testing was designed to accomplish--finding the best candidates who otherwise wouldn't have tried/known.

Agreed. 100%. (From a parent whose child didn't quite make it (super high quantitative, but the other sections in the lower 90s) and will be attending home school where he will be bored in his LA classes and causing his teachers no amount of frustration, just like he did all through ES. They will have to provide him challenge otherwise he will be quite challenging to deal with.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The problem is not universal testing - I think it is a good thing. The problem is rejecting students because they have a peer group in the home school, while not providing anything even remotely equivalent to what the magnet programs offer at their home school. That is the "new and improved" process for this year. (The icing on the cake is to tell the parents to "work with the principal for programming and grouping practices." http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/curriculum/specialprograms/middle/Frequently%20Asked%20Questions%20Eastern%20and%20Takoma%20Park%20Magnet%20ProgramsFINAL(1).pdf)

MCPS has a very bad track record of challenging advanced learners in their home schools.

They're telling you to do it. So stop complaining and go do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously we they screened the ENTIRE student popultion they found some really smart kids with parents who aren't obsessive about their kids' educations. I love that they removed the parent component! It means access for all, not just the savvy. I'm eager to see what it means for CES!

However, there is an obvious need to make sure the high achieving kids who didn't get into a special program are having their academic needs met, and, as I think we all know, that means clustering. This is good for kids and for teachers.

Agreed. People need to recognize that their white, UMC snowflake child isn't going to get a leg up just because they want snowflake to feel special 24/7. Equitable access to these programs is a *good* thing.

- a white UMC mom

White UMC mother here; DH and I are both educated professionals. DC got accepted to MS magnet this year and had they not had universal screening we wouldn't have even applied, because while we consider our child to be very smart, it wouldn't have crossed our mind to presume that our child would necessarily be head and shoulders above the rest. (We're from the Midwest, so maybe it's Midwestern humbleness and "Please-you-go-ahead-of-us-ness"at play here ). When DC got accepted and I saw the scores, I was surprised. So if our family--white and UMC and education-oriented--wouldn't have even bothered applying, undoubtedly there are many, many other families out there who have highly able children but benefit from universal screening and removing the need for parental savvy and parental aspirations.

Ockham's razor: the simplest explanation is usually the best explanation. They screened lots more people this year so not a surprise that the traditional results were different. This is exactly what universal testing was designed to accomplish--finding the best candidates who otherwise wouldn't have tried/known.

This rings true. I could easily have been a parent who didn't know to seek out these programs, but there was an older child on our street who went to an HGC (at the time). That lead us to apply and get in, this snowballed among neighbors, I'd say our block was over represented. And, probably no shortage of kids a couple streets over who never applied. It was word of mouth that sparked interest even though everyone received the mailings. As far as the poster who's saying their HGC is now under represented for the first time this year, it's probably that so many more students from their home ES were screened and found to be comparable to HGC peers. It's not necessarily kids from elsewhere in the county that received the slots.

Congratulations to everyone who received good news, screening more kids is important.

Yeah right, students not getting admitted because they have a peer group in their home school has nothing to do with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the CES/CHG parents are so shocked. Only a subset of the most savvy parents had their kids tested for CES/CHG. And in the past that same small subset applied for magnets.

Now that CES/CHG and magnets testing is on ALL students, the classrooms are going to look different.

My 99%er didn't even get into her HOME SCHOOL magnet with dedicated slots (TPMS)!

now that more kids are being tested, are the schools going to start taking steps to accommodate the 99%ers who didn't get into the CES?

From what was posted above, apparently it's up to parents to somehow make that happen. So, in short, no.

Feels like we're going in circles here.. ultimately, it is terribly unfair that a lot of children capable of academic achievement do not get the curriculum they deserve. In the past, those were the children of uninvolved parents who were capable of doing the work but didn't apply to magnets simply by being unaware of the opportunity; this year, it's the children of highly involved parents who didn't get a spot in the program because those were taken by kids from the other side of the tracks. If MCPS think it is 'fair', I don't agree. 'Fair' would be creating programs that would cater to every single high-achiever. If Fairfax County could do that, what's holding MCPS back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, MCPS changed from selecting 200 magnet students out of 800 self-selected applicants to picking 200 magnet students from a pool of 4000 county IDed kids and the DCUM penut gallery is surprised that the results of selection are very different? Hmm ...

If this was indeed all that happened I would say bravo MCPS for expanding the pool, for encouraging more families to apply etc. If this result is because a greater number of highly qualified candidates are applying I would be very happy

if they changed the selection criteria so a top performing kid is rejected only because he/she is zoned for a W school that is discrimination. If they are using geography as a proxy for race that is discrimination

In their selection criteria, it already said that cohorts are used. So yes, by your reasoning, they discriminated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Feels like we're going in circles here.. ultimately, it is terribly unfair that a lot of children capable of academic achievement do not get the curriculum they deserve. In the past, those were the children of uninvolved parents who were capable of doing the work but didn't apply to magnets simply by being unaware of the opportunity; this year, it's the children of highly involved parents who didn't get a spot in the program because those were taken by kids from the other side of the tracks. If MCPS think it is 'fair', I don't agree. 'Fair' would be creating programs that would cater to every single high-achiever. If Fairfax County could do that, what's holding MCPS back?

Read the Virginia schools forum to find out whether FCPS parents agree that FCPS does that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously we they screened the ENTIRE student popultion they found some really smart kids with parents who aren't obsessive about their kids' educations. I love that they removed the parent component! It means access for all, not just the savvy. I'm eager to see what it means for CES!

However, there is an obvious need to make sure the high achieving kids who didn't get into a special program are having their academic needs met, and, as I think we all know, that means clustering. This is good for kids and for teachers.

Agreed. People need to recognize that their white, UMC snowflake child isn't going to get a leg up just because they want snowflake to feel special 24/7. Equitable access to these programs is a *good* thing.

- a white UMC mom

White UMC mother here; DH and I are both educated professionals. DC got accepted to MS magnet this year and had they not had universal screening we wouldn't have even applied, because while we consider our child to be very smart, it wouldn't have crossed our mind to presume that our child would necessarily be head and shoulders above the rest. (We're from the Midwest, so maybe it's Midwestern humbleness and "Please-you-go-ahead-of-us-ness"at play here ). When DC got accepted and I saw the scores, I was surprised. So if our family--white and UMC and education-oriented--wouldn't have even bothered applying, undoubtedly there are many, many other families out there who have highly able children but benefit from universal screening and removing the need for parental savvy and parental aspirations.

Ockham's razor: the simplest explanation is usually the best explanation. They screened lots more people this year so not a surprise that the traditional results were different. This is exactly what universal testing was designed to accomplish--finding the best candidates who otherwise wouldn't have tried/known.

This rings true. I could easily have been a parent who didn't know to seek out these programs, but there was an older child on our street who went to an HGC (at the time). That lead us to apply and get in, this snowballed among neighbors, I'd say our block was over represented. And, probably no shortage of kids a couple streets over who never applied. It was word of mouth that sparked interest even though everyone received the mailings. As far as the poster who's saying their HGC is now under represented for the first time this year, it's probably that so many more students from their home ES were screened and found to be comparable to HGC peers. It's not necessarily kids from elsewhere in the county that received the slots.

Congratulations to everyone who received good news, screening more kids is important.

Another W parent here, white and living in a $1m+ house in Bethesda. I would not have requested testing for my 5th grader, but he was tested this year. He is a straight A student with high scores on Map and PARCC plus he scored highly on the magnet test. We are also foreign nationals (i.e. legal, but not American). He was NOT offered a place at either Eastern or Takoma Park, and that's totally fine, if he had been offered a spot it would have been a dilemma for us deciding due to the horrible 2 hours on buses each way issue. We are supplementing his academic strengths and interests already, outside of his ES and will continue to do so in MS. I am sure there are lots like us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the CES/CHG parents are so shocked. Only a subset of the most savvy parents had their kids tested for CES/CHG. And in the past that same small subset applied for magnets.

Now that CES/CHG and magnets testing is on ALL students, the classrooms are going to look different.

My 99%er didn't even get into her HOME SCHOOL magnet with dedicated slots (TPMS)!

now that more kids are being tested, are the schools going to start taking steps to accommodate the 99%ers who didn't get into the CES?

The school system needs to accommodate these kids by not just clustering them together, but providing them a curriculum that best fits them be it at home school or elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, MCPS changed from selecting 200 magnet students out of 800 self-selected applicants to picking 200 magnet students from a pool of 4000 county IDed kids and the DCUM penut gallery is surprised that the results of selection are very different? Hmm ...

If this was indeed all that happened I would say bravo MCPS for expanding the pool, for encouraging more families to apply etc. If this result is because a greater number of highly qualified candidates are applying I would be very happy

if they changed the selection criteria so a top performing kid is rejected only because he/she is zoned for a W school that is discrimination. If they are using geography as a proxy for race that is discrimination

In their selection criteria, it already said that cohorts are used. So yes, by your reasoning, they discriminated.

Sounds like the Ivy admissions; it's much easier to get in by being a valedictorian at Bumf--k High in Omaha than being one of the top 10 students at Whitman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously we they screened the ENTIRE student popultion they found some really smart kids with parents who aren't obsessive about their kids' educations. I love that they removed the parent component! It means access for all, not just the savvy. I'm eager to see what it means for CES!

However, there is an obvious need to make sure the high achieving kids who didn't get into a special program are having their academic needs met, and, as I think we all know, that means clustering. This is good for kids and for teachers.

Agreed. People need to recognize that their white, UMC snowflake child isn't going to get a leg up just because they want snowflake to feel special 24/7. Equitable access to these programs is a *good* thing.

- a white UMC mom

White UMC mother here; DH and I are both educated professionals. DC got accepted to MS magnet this year and had they not had universal screening we wouldn't have even applied, because while we consider our child to be very smart, it wouldn't have crossed our mind to presume that our child would necessarily be head and shoulders above the rest. (We're from the Midwest, so maybe it's Midwestern humbleness and "Please-you-go-ahead-of-us-ness"at play here ). When DC got accepted and I saw the scores, I was surprised. So if our family--white and UMC and education-oriented--wouldn't have even bothered applying, undoubtedly there are many, many other families out there who have highly able children but benefit from universal screening and removing the need for parental savvy and parental aspirations.

Ockham's razor: the simplest explanation is usually the best explanation. They screened lots more people this year so not a surprise that the traditional results were different. This is exactly what universal testing was designed to accomplish--finding the best candidates who otherwise wouldn't have tried/known.

I find this "mid-west humility" hilariously pretentious. Especially, the final "teaching moment. Sorry, but it is. Great that your kid got in and did well. But, when 2 kids from CS get in and Oakview has "no"s across the board w/ 5 kids still waiting, that is beyond the realm of the bigger pool theory. There are clearly other factors at play. Will be interesting to see how next year at the magnets plays out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

This - my Eastern child is incensed by this - he says, and rightly so, that if there are that many qualified kids, then there should be more slots for them. He's also more than a little concerned that there were no essays this year - he says with all the writing at Eastern how do they know whether those kids are going to be up to the task, or are they going to water down the curriculum? I told him that the kids will self-select, and they are all more than capable of doing the work - in fact there are probably several hundred more kids that are more than capable of doing this work and being told that they are not going to get the opportunity.

Yes, I am stymied as to why they ditched the essay, awards, activities and teacher recs. All of these give insights beyond testing that hep determine if a kid is a good fit for MSM. Isn't that what the choice report was saying? Don't strictly base on testing? THis year's approach seems to cater towards the good testers (and those in advantageous locations for the selection it seems).

My kids have gotten into ES, MS & HS magnets. Every one they applied to. Not because they had the best test scores across the board either. There were other factors that recommended them that were revealed through the essays, awards, activities and teacher recs. They are A students in magnet. It seems like this more holistic view of the submitted material was a better way forward than eliminating it all.

Though, I do think universal testing is good for inclusion. Maybe it should be used as a screening tool. Take top half and have them submit apps?