US News rankings are out with individual magnet program rankings as well

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.

That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.

Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf

Stop using actual facts to contradict the PP grievance narrative.

Reply to your self all you want. You peer group avg means nothing when 99% of the school isn’t in that peer group. Sure a couple of very smart kids bused in from nicer parts of town do comparable to the schools full of smart kids from nicer parts of town. No one is disputing that. Problem is Blair isn’t filled with smart kids from the nicer parts of town, we are talking whole school averages sweetie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.

The injecting of OOB kids has done exactly what it was always intended to do, raise test scores and public perception to suppress middle class flight. Without the magnets TP and Blair might not have made it out of the doldrums of the 90s to be positioned to be the inside the beltway preference for the families who could only afford Silver Spring in the DCC during DCs revitalization. Even with the influx of upper middle class families and the bused in magnet kids, the fact that it’s test score and rankings are as low as they are shows how close the majority of the school is to being an Einstein or Kennedy equivalent. It’s success can almost solely be attributed to the magnet being put there.

Not really. Yes, when you look at test averages by demographic there is little impact on any demographic score other than Asian since the magnet has maybe 100 non-Asian kids in a school of 3000.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.

That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.

Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf

Both my kids went through Blair. The one who wasn't in the magnet took 12 APs and 5 magnet classes. They ended up with a full-ride to UMDCP and 30 college credits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.

That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.

Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf

Stop using actual facts to contradict the PP grievance narrative.

They sure hate it when these inconvenient facts contradict their fictional worldview.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is unfortunate because Blair SMCS and CAP are schools within a school and should be ranked independently.

No, they are not. They are programs integrated within the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.

That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.

Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf

Stop using actual facts to contradict the PP grievance narrative.

Reply to your self all you want. You peer group avg means nothing when 99% of the school isn’t in that peer group. Sure a couple of very smart kids bused in from nicer parts of town do comparable to the schools full of smart kids from nicer parts of town. No one is disputing that. Problem is Blair isn’t filled with smart kids from the nicer parts of town, we are talking whole school averages sweetie.

DP.. if 99% of the group is not in a magnet, but the scores are reported as a whole of the school, then that means the magnet cohort doesn't put a huge dent in the score.

Regardless, if you look at that SAT scores by demographics within a school, and then look at the demographics of the magnet cohort, you can get a sense of which scores are skewed due to magnets and which aren't.

Having stated that, however, there are some in cluster students who are also in the magnet program in the school (like RM cluster students who are in the RMIB magnet), so that skews things, too. Those kids would be and should be part of the magnet AND nonmagnet group since they live in the cluster. It's not easy to slice and dice the numbers the way you want.

There are some really smart kids in the cluster (both RM and Blair), but those schools also have a fair amount of low income students who don't score as high. Just as you claim that magnet students skew the results, so, too, the low income students skew the results.

You'd have to take the low income student scores and those of the non-in cluster magnet students out of the equation to get an apples to apples comparison.

Otherwise, it's an apples to oranges comparison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.

That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.

Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf

Stop using actual facts to contradict the PP grievance narrative.

Reply to your self all you want. You peer group avg means nothing when 99% of the school isn’t in that peer group. Sure a couple of very smart kids bused in from nicer parts of town do comparable to the schools full of smart kids from nicer parts of town. No one is disputing that. Problem is Blair isn’t filled with smart kids from the nicer parts of town, we are talking whole school averages sweetie.

DP.. if 99% of the group is not in a magnet, but the scores are reported as a whole of the school, then that means the magnet cohort doesn't put a huge dent in the score.

Regardless, if you look at that SAT scores by demographics within a school, and then look at the demographics of the magnet cohort, you can get a sense of which scores are skewed due to magnets and which aren't.

Having stated that, however, there are some in cluster students who are also in the magnet program in the school (like RM cluster students who are in the RMIB magnet), so that skews things, too. Those kids would be and should be part of the magnet AND nonmagnet group since they live in the cluster. It's not easy to slice and dice the numbers the way you want.

There are some really smart kids in the cluster (both RM and Blair), but those schools also have a fair amount of low income students who don't score as high. Just as you claim that magnet students skew the results, so, too, the low income students skew the results.

You'd have to take the low income student scores and those of the non-in cluster magnet students out of the equation to get an apples to apples comparison.

Otherwise, it's an apples to oranges comparison.

Not if they do not define the truly define and scale the demographics. That is like saying the top 5 kids at Kennedy did slightly better than the avg of all of Thomas Jefferson in Va and then defining those top 5 kids a demographic and then declaring Kennedy is a better school than TG. It is one line cherry picked and taken out of context with all other data points ignored.

To make that leap it would require ignoring the Top 5 and bottom 200 at TJ. It is a classic cherry pick argument especially considering that many if not most of the kids being claimed by the Blair booster are pulled from the schools being compared to exactly for their ability to do well on tests. Of course they are similar a similar demographic many of them are neighbors to the Walt Johnson, BCC, Churchill and Whitman kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.

That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.

Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf

Stop using actual facts to contradict the PP grievance narrative.

Reply to your self all you want. You peer group avg means nothing when 99% of the school isn’t in that peer group. Sure a couple of very smart kids bused in from nicer parts of town do comparable to the schools full of smart kids from nicer parts of town. No one is disputing that. Problem is Blair isn’t filled with smart kids from the nicer parts of town, we are talking whole school averages sweetie.

DP.. if 99% of the group is not in a magnet, but the scores are reported as a whole of the school, then that means the magnet cohort doesn't put a huge dent in the score.

Regardless, if you look at that SAT scores by demographics within a school, and then look at the demographics of the magnet cohort, you can get a sense of which scores are skewed due to magnets and which aren't.

Having stated that, however, there are some in cluster students who are also in the magnet program in the school (like RM cluster students who are in the RMIB magnet), so that skews things, too. Those kids would be and should be part of the magnet AND nonmagnet group since they live in the cluster. It's not easy to slice and dice the numbers the way you want.

There are some really smart kids in the cluster (both RM and Blair), but those schools also have a fair amount of low income students who don't score as high. Just as you claim that magnet students skew the results, so, too, the low income students skew the results.

You'd have to take the low income student scores and those of the non-in cluster magnet students out of the equation to get an apples to apples comparison.

Otherwise, it's an apples to oranges comparison.

Not if they do not define the truly define and scale the demographics. That is like saying the top 5 kids at Kennedy did slightly better than the avg of all of Thomas Jefferson in Va and then defining those top 5 kids a demographic and then declaring Kennedy is a better school than TG. It is one line cherry picked and taken out of context with all other data points ignored.

To make that leap it would require ignoring the Top 5 and bottom 200 at TJ. It is a classic cherry pick argument especially considering that many if not most of the kids being claimed by the Blair booster are pulled from the schools being compared to exactly for their ability to do well on tests. Of course they are similar a similar demographic many of them are neighbors to the Walt Johnson, BCC, Churchill and Whitman kids

Yes, that would be true, but nobody does that so your point is moot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is unfortunate because Blair SMCS and CAP are schools within a school and should be ranked independently.

No, they are not. They are programs integrated within the school.

Yes, they are integrated and the kids in those programs take most of their classes alongside kids not in those programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blair 2nd to none…. Except the almost 200 higher ranked magnet programs. Not even top three in the county

that just proved that the ranking is not very meaningful.

You must be a Blair parent. Strange how no one outside the DCC seems to share the high regard for the school as the PTA does. I’m glad they’re happy

Not true. Seems like a data-gathering issue as it was the first year.

didn't that effect everyone equally? Also Blair is never ranked very highly, this is not an aberration

I think it is the first year that magnets have been ranked. Isn't that true?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would CAP program be dragging the Blair numbers down?

maybe kids in CAP don't score as high ?

That seems like a pretty big and totally unsubstantiated assumption, though. The CAP kids I know are well-rounded and bright, just like the SMCS kids. I suppose it is possible that the SMCS kids do better on the math section of the SAT and the CAP kids do better on the English section, but that's just conjecture.

Big difference in scores. Even among well rounded bright kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at Blair overall, can you really blame U.S. News? Their numbers (outside of SMAC) stink. The Magnet was supposed to "raise up" Blair for Silver Spring, but instead it's just a bad HS overall with an ineffective Magnet. A lot of parents in "W's" are just keeping their kids at their home school and tutoring on the side, so now AEI has egg all over their face for screwing up again. MCPS can try bussing for equity, but we'll see how that works out at the next board election.

That's strange when I look at the SAT average for the largest cohort common to Blair and the W's Blair scores higher.

Blair 1326
Walter Johnson 1275
Wootton 1262
Churchill 1257

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2017/1771102HS%20Princ_SAT%20Partic_Perf%20Class%20of%202017.pdf

Stop using actual facts to contradict the PP grievance narrative.

Reply to your self all you want. You peer group avg means nothing when 99% of the school isn’t in that peer group. Sure a couple of very smart kids bused in from nicer parts of town do comparable to the schools full of smart kids from nicer parts of town. No one is disputing that. Problem is Blair isn’t filled with smart kids from the nicer parts of town, we are talking whole school averages sweetie.

You are a classist ass.

[Anonymous]

Is APEX at Walter Johnson considered a magnet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blair 2nd to none…. Except the almost 200 higher ranked magnet programs. Not even top three in the county

that just proved that the ranking is not very meaningful.

You must be a Blair parent. Strange how no one outside the DCC seems to share the high regard for the school as the PTA does. I’m glad they’re happy

Not true. Seems like a data-gathering issue as it was the first year.

didn't that effect everyone equally? Also Blair is never ranked very highly, this is not an aberration

I think it is the first year that magnets have been ranked. Isn't that true?

It's not that they ranked the magnet programs per se; they just ranked the schools overall like they always do, then they picked out the schools that contained magnet programs and published a new list of just those schools, in their ranked order.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is APEX at Walter Johnson considered a magnet?

Nope. It's only available to students within the WJ cluster.