Robert Frost beats Takoma Park in Mathcounts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
We're talking about TPMS here. The majority of the students are overwhelming white and asian, though there are far more whites than asians there now thanks to MCPS changes. There are very very few low income kids who meet the pre-recs to get into a magnet class so again this is just helping the less qualified local white kids.

I've heard this too, and the statistics seem to bear out that some of their new "peer cohort" criteria did not always result in the students they intended to catch. The biggest boost goes goes to "prepped" middle class white students whose parents live in poorer districts. If Asian students lived in these districts they would benefit too but the culture in the immigrant community has been to save save save and sacrifice to get your child into a high performing school district. I think MCPS should have anticipated this issue, and they may well have and thought it was a good trade off.

The new criteria doubled the number of Hispanic and AA students in the program from the prior year according to the county's data they published which shared on this board a few months ago.

[Anonymous]

While also increasing the number of seats for whites. The only group that "lost" seats are Asians.

[Anonymous]

What it would be critical to see is the number of "highly able" students broken down by race. The number of admitted students admitted by race should not mirror the demographics of the total student body but of the highly able students.

If you look at PARCC scores (the only data available) Asians as a whole tend to do much better than other races.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only group that "lost" seats are Asians.

Yes and no. The number of kids considered for the magnet increased by leaps and bounds for every group but Asians, which suggests that the Asian parents were the only ones correctly identifying their kids as candidates under the old system.

[Anonymous]

Wow! There is so much prejudice and blatant racism/classism in this thread. Some of the PPs should be ashamed of themselves.

By all accounts it’s tougher to get into this program than ever. All fifth graders are accepted and the top 100 only (out of 11,000 are admitted). These mythical kids who get in with mediocre scores don’t exist. And this view that children of hr directors or non profit administrators are lesser than. WT actual F??!! Which of you think your choice of career makes you superior (or smarter) than others? What about the kids of teachers, firefighters, social workers? Do you look down on your friends and neighbors like this in real life? Wow. I had no idea. As a non scientist I’ve never felt inferior to those who choose different career paths or areas of academic focus — why would that make them “smarter”?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only group that "lost" seats are Asians.

Yes and no. The number of kids considered for the magnet increased by leaps and bounds for every group but Asians, which suggests that the Asian parents were the only ones correctly identifying their kids as candidates under the old system.

Where is this information?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While also increasing the number of seats for whites. The only group that "lost" seats are Asians.

Yes, I think Aisans who make up 14% of the county went from having 60% of the seats to something like 55%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What it would be critical to see is the number of "highly able" students broken down by race. The number of admitted students admitted by race should not mirror the demographics of the total student body but of the highly able students.

If you look at PARCC scores (the only data available) Asians as a whole tend to do much better than other races.

+1 Absolutely.

It's not by race but it would give you some idea of where the high performers are concentrated in. Data is a couple of years old, but I doubt it's changed that much.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/msmagnet/about/MS%20Magnet%20Field%20Test%20Data%20by%20Sending%20MS.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow! There is so much prejudice and blatant racism/classism in this thread. Some of the PPs should be ashamed of themselves.

By all accounts it’s tougher to get into this program than ever. All fifth graders are accepted and the top 100 only (out of 11,000 are admitted). These mythical kids who get in with mediocre scores don’t exist. And this view that children of hr directors or non profit administrators are lesser than. WT actual F??!! Which of you think your choice of career makes you superior (or smarter) than others? What about the kids of teachers, firefighters, social workers? Do you look down on your friends and neighbors like this in real life? Wow. I had no idea. As a non scientist I’ve never felt inferior to those who choose different career paths or areas of academic focus — why would that make them “smarter”?!

"Top 100" based on peer cohort, and not the entire county. That is what many are upset about. -signed a non scientist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While also increasing the number of seats for whites. The only group that "lost" seats are Asians.

Yes, I think Aisans who make up 14% of the county went from having 60% of the seats to something like 55%.

? not even close. Try half that amount.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/info/choice/ChoiceStudyReport-Version2-20160307.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What it would be critical to see is the number of "highly able" students broken down by race. The number of admitted students admitted by race should not mirror the demographics of the total student body but of the highly able students.

If you look at PARCC scores (the only data available) Asians as a whole tend to do much better than other races.

This data should be made public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow! There is so much prejudice and blatant racism/classism in this thread. Some of the PPs should be ashamed of themselves.

By all accounts it’s tougher to get into this program than ever. All fifth graders are accepted and the top 100 only (out of 11,000 are admitted). These mythical kids who get in with mediocre scores don’t exist. And this view that children of hr directors or non profit administrators are lesser than. WT actual F??!! Which of you think your choice of career makes you superior (or smarter) than others? What about the kids of teachers, firefighters, social workers? Do you look down on your friends and neighbors like this in real life? Wow. I had no idea. As a non scientist I’ve never felt inferior to those who choose different career paths or areas of academic focus — why would that make them “smarter”?!

"Top 100" based on peer cohort, and not the entire county. That is what many are upset about. -signed a non scientist.

It’s the top performers at each school. That’s the top 100 in my book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow! There is so much prejudice and blatant racism/classism in this thread. Some of the PPs should be ashamed of themselves.

By all accounts it’s tougher to get into this program than ever. All fifth graders are accepted and the top 100 only (out of 11,000 are admitted). These mythical kids who get in with mediocre scores don’t exist. And this view that children of hr directors or non profit administrators are lesser than. WT actual F??!! Which of you think your choice of career makes you superior (or smarter) than others? What about the kids of teachers, firefighters, social workers? Do you look down on your friends and neighbors like this in real life? Wow. I had no idea. As a non scientist I’ve never felt inferior to those who choose different career paths or areas of academic focus — why would that make them “smarter”?!

"Top 100" based on peer cohort, and not the entire county. That is what many are upset about. -signed a non scientist.

It’s the top performers at each school. That’s the top 100 in my book.

Your book seems to be written in crayon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only group that "lost" seats are Asians.

Yes and no. The number of kids considered for the magnet increased by leaps and bounds for every group but Asians, which suggests that the Asian parents were the only ones correctly identifying their kids as candidates under the old system.

Where is this information?

I can’t find the official MCPS report right now, but you can see the chart here under Students Considered.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/mcps-pilots-universal-evaluation-process-for-middle-school-magnet-programs/

Essentially, the number of Asian-Americans considered for magnets went up by about 1.5 times under the new system, but the increases were much higher for other groups. Highest percentage increase was for Latinx students, but the absolute numbers were still pretty small. Biggest number increase was for Whites, who were about 4.5 times more likely to be considered under the new system. In 2017, the number of Asian-American kids applying for magnets was almost twice as many as the number of White kids. Under universal screening, that more or less reversed, making the applicant pool for White and Asian-American kids more reflective of their numbers in the general population (although Black and Latinx kids were still underrepresented.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only group that "lost" seats are Asians.

Yes and no. The number of kids considered for the magnet increased by leaps and bounds for every group but Asians, which suggests that the Asian parents were the only ones correctly identifying their kids as candidates under the old system.

Where is this information?

I can’t find the official MCPS report right now, but you can see the chart here under Students Considered.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/mcps-pilots-universal-evaluation-process-for-middle-school-magnet-programs/

Essentially, the number of Asian-Americans considered for magnets went up by about 1.5 times under the new system, but the increases were much higher for other groups. Highest percentage increase was for Latinx students, but the absolute numbers were still pretty small. Biggest number increase was for Whites, who were about 4.5 times more likely to be considered under the new system. In 2017, the number of Asian-American kids applying for magnets was almost twice as many as the number of White kids. Under universal screening, that more or less reversed, making the applicant pool for White and Asian-American kids more reflective of their numbers in the general population (although Black and Latinx kids were still underrepresented.)

Thanks for finding this info.