mcps. sounds about right. (GT admissions changes)

[Anonymous]

The CES rejection letter emphasizes that needs can be met at the home school with presence of a peer group, but quite a few kids from our home school (10+) went to the CES and more seem to be coming off the waitlist. There honestly doesn't seem to be a peer group left. DC was 99th percentile all around. Some of the kids pulled from the waitlist had lower scores. I realize there are other factors at play but it is frustrating. Our principal has emphasized that high achievers get split into different classrooms to achieve balance in each room.

[Anonymous]

NP here, with a child in the enriched MS classes and one in the CES.
I'd hoped that DC1, my 6th grader, would qualify for the humanities magnet, but I'm happy with the way it worked out. Once I got my kid's magnet rejection letter and read all these DCUM boards, I realized that there are many kids in MCPS that will have scored as high as (or higher than) DC1, and if these others were from less advantaged backgrounds--we're white UMC, btw.-- then it's a good thing in principle. We'd just have to make the best of it. Later I learned that DC1's COGAT score was higher that the median (?) for accepted students, but at that point I was also happy that DC1 wouldn't have the longer bus ride & could be with neighborhood peers, and I was also then learning about the enriched classes. Now DC1's enriched classes have at least one former CES kid, and I'm fine with a peer group like this. (We weren't in MCPS last year, hence DC1 didn't come from a CES/HGC). Sure, it's just 2 enriched classes out of several, but this will be fine for now--my child is taking a foreign language for the first time and sure wouldn't need to be accelerated/enriched in that area. And there's gym, art, etc., where it's harder to argue for enriched versions.

For DC2, my 4th grader, I'm relieved that he did make the cut, because he would not otherwise have a challenging setting which he needs. But I'll add that he hates to read, and is more inclined to do math and to solve puzzles. He'll need to up his game if he's with avid, advanced readers, and I'm fine with that.
I assume the kids in the CES will have a variety of dimensions in which they are gifted---some who love to read, write, and can excel in those areas, others who are like my son. There are also likely to be children who have been able to handle accelerated work, which someone (likely from parent's side) have given them the opportunity, and perhaps the discipline, to pursue. Others haven't gotten that far ahead curriculum-wise, but may be naturally good analyzers or thinkers or similar.

I'm inclined to think that the 'gifted' criteria for magnets/CES isn't 'what you know already' but 'how you can absorb and build on the learning you have and tackle new learning challenges'. And that it's the latter that these programs are designed to further encourage. Isn't that why they have the non-verbal/non-math section of the Cogat with the puzzles? But there seem to be 2 sets of expectations--1) thinking that kids should excel by advancing in their subject matter--and that this should be both the criteria for and outcome of a gifted program...., or 2) thinking that kids are there because they can figure things out easily and adapt mentally...and that this should be both the criteria for and outcome of a gifted program. I'm in camp 2.

I do wonder about these 'catch up classes'. I'd be surprised if the magnet 6th grades are so far ahead curriculum-wise at the start of the school year from where MCPS 5th grades generally left off at the end. A bright student would have already mastered their 5th grade curriculum and should be able to pick things up easily as the 6th grade kicks off.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And what is this all about?

SILVER SPRING, Md. — It was a searing summer day before the start of the school year, but Julianni and Giselle Wyche, 10-year-old twins, were in a classroom, engineering mini rockets, writing in journals and learning words like “fluctuate” and “cognizant.”

Do they now have remedial 'gifted' education? Why were these kids even in school?

You know the answer to this, if you take a minute (or care). The children are naturally gifted (their test scores etc. bear that out), but their education thus far has not been up to the level of the children with whom they will be attending class, so they can get quick instruction in the summer and be able to be just as competent as the child that is coming from an enhanced, enriched, background.

[Anonymous]

MCPS successfully reduced the Asian students in its MS magnet with their invention of bogus ‘cohort’ elimination. As a result, more white students benefitted from the reform.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do they take socioeconomic status into account? What does MCPS know of socioeconomic status besides FARMs or not?

They don't. They can't. All they know is

-do you qualify for free or reduced meals
-what home schools are you zoned for

DCUM likes to refer to SES, but it's really just plain ES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The CES rejection letter emphasizes that needs can be met at the home school with presence of a peer group, but quite a few kids from our home school (10+) went to the CES and more seem to be coming off the waitlist. There honestly doesn't seem to be a peer group left. DC was 99th percentile all around. Some of the kids pulled from the waitlist had lower scores. I realize there are other factors at play but it is frustrating. Our principal has emphasized that high achievers get split into different classrooms to achieve balance in each room.

Coming off the waitlist now? Isn't that too late?

FWIW, PP, I can relate. My child was also 99 percent all around and wasn't even waitlisted. I don't know what 'other factors' are in play here but it sure is not fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And as people have stated, putting less weight on test scores would result in lowering the ability of the group:

Kimberly Petrola, a fourth-grade teacher at Fox Chapel Elementary School in Germantown, one of the Centers for Enriched Studies, acknowledged that instruction had changed since the school became part of the pilot program last year, ahead of the rest of the county.

With a more diverse student body, not every child performed above grade level, Ms. Petrola said. She said she and other teachers used ability grouping to teach at different levels. For example, for a unit in which students read an author’s autobiography and fiction side by side, to look for consistent themes, some groups were assigned authors who wrote at a more challenging reading level.

That was happening 15+ years ago, when the HGC was expanded due to political pressure.

~CES (former HGC) teacher

This is so gonna happen to the 1-2 magnet classes in the pilot MSs, and then to pilot HSs and so on. To 100% catch up the magnet curriculum, you need student not only bright, but the outlier of the total, not the outlier from each school. Similarly, grouping outliers of the whole together with other "bright" peers would certainly wash down the local magnet program - teacher has to slow down for a diversified group to catch up, or keep the speed and left a lot of kids failed. Not to mention the lack of "bright teacher" in local program and lack of enough training for the magnet curriculum. This is what "political correctness" do to MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The CES rejection letter emphasizes that needs can be met at the home school with presence of a peer group, but quite a few kids from our home school (10+) went to the CES and more seem to be coming off the waitlist. There honestly doesn't seem to be a peer group left. DC was 99th percentile all around. Some of the kids pulled from the waitlist had lower scores. I realize there are other factors at play but it is frustrating. Our principal has emphasized that high achievers get split into different classrooms to achieve balance in each room.

Coming off the waitlist now? Isn't that too late?

FWIW, PP, I can relate. My child was also 99 percent all around and wasn't even waitlisted. I don't know what 'other factors' are in play here but it sure is not fair.

Didn’t the article mention they de-emphasized the standardized testing and emphasized student’s grades instead. It’s not unfair if other kids had higher grades than your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The CES rejection letter emphasizes that needs can be met at the home school with presence of a peer group, but quite a few kids from our home school (10+) went to the CES and more seem to be coming off the waitlist. There honestly doesn't seem to be a peer group left. DC was 99th percentile all around. Some of the kids pulled from the waitlist had lower scores. I realize there are other factors at play but it is frustrating. Our principal has emphasized that high achievers get split into different classrooms to achieve balance in each room.

Coming off the waitlist now? Isn't that too late?

FWIW, PP, I can relate. My child was also 99 percent all around and wasn't even waitlisted. I don't know what 'other factors' are in play here but it sure is not fair.

Didn’t the article mention they de-emphasized the standardized testing and emphasized student’s grades instead. It’s not unfair if other kids had higher grades than your kid.

Grades, like teacher recs, can be subjective, especially in non math subjects.

[Anonymous]

At least two kids from our elementary school came off the waitlist this week and transferred into the CES. I believe they will transfer kids in throughout the fall as others decide it isn't for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm fine with universal screening, but using the cohort criteria really does exclude the brighter kids.

But don’t they get the advanced classes at their home school? I thought they send the kids who are advanced but there’s not enough (20?) other advanced kids at their school, and where there are enough kids to form a class they keep them at their home school? I’d prefer my kid be at the home school, unless the magnet is close.

No. If it was the exact same curriculum, then yes, but it's not the same curriculum, so no.. those one or two classes does not make a magnet program.

It does give them a peer group.

What good does that do if they are not getting the same exact curriculum as the magnet? They are getting a watered down version, and because they have a bigger cohort, they were not selected, but are missing out on the more challenging curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The CES rejection letter emphasizes that needs can be met at the home school with presence of a peer group, but quite a few kids from our home school (10+) went to the CES and more seem to be coming off the waitlist. There honestly doesn't seem to be a peer group left. DC was 99th percentile all around. Some of the kids pulled from the waitlist had lower scores. I realize there are other factors at play but it is frustrating. Our principal has emphasized that high achievers get split into different classrooms to achieve balance in each room.

Coming off the waitlist now? Isn't that too late?

FWIW, PP, I can relate. My child was also 99 percent all around and wasn't even waitlisted. I don't know what 'other factors' are in play here but it sure is not fair.

It sucks that your 99% kid didn't get in, but just to clarify that kids are coming off the waitlist now because some kids didn't turn up after summer vacation and other kids immediately decided to return to their home school. My understanding is that the waitlist at this point is a total lottery - no preference based on scores, which frankly is kind of terrible for the kids who barely missed the cutoff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And what is this all about?

SILVER SPRING, Md. — It was a searing summer day before the start of the school year, but Julianni and Giselle Wyche, 10-year-old twins, were in a classroom, engineering mini rockets, writing in journals and learning words like “fluctuate” and “cognizant.”

Do they now have remedial 'gifted' education? Why were these kids even in school?

You know the answer to this, if you take a minute (or care). The children are naturally gifted (their test scores etc. bear that out), but their education thus far has not been up to the level of the children with whom they will be attending class, so they can get quick instruction in the summer and be able to be just as competent as the child that is coming from an enhanced, enriched, background.

Mkay.. and then there are other children who are also 'naturally gifted' and there test -- and proficiency -- scores bear that out, but their education thus far has not been up to the their abilities - and then they are turned down for enriched instruction and are stuck in their home schools with ridiculously dumb-down curriculum.


Doesn't that bother at you at all?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And as people have stated, putting less weight on test scores would result in lowering the ability of the group:

Kimberly Petrola, a fourth-grade teacher at Fox Chapel Elementary School in Germantown, one of the Centers for Enriched Studies, acknowledged that instruction had changed since the school became part of the pilot program last year, ahead of the rest of the county.

With a more diverse student body, not every child performed above grade level, Ms. Petrola said. She said she and other teachers used ability grouping to teach at different levels. For example, for a unit in which students read an author’s autobiography and fiction side by side, to look for consistent themes, some groups were assigned authors who wrote at a more challenging reading level.

That was happening 15+ years ago, when the HGC was expanded due to political pressure.

~CES (former HGC) teacher

And it's getting worse due to the new selection process of taking peer cohort into account.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The CES rejection letter emphasizes that needs can be met at the home school with presence of a peer group, but quite a few kids from our home school (10+) went to the CES and more seem to be coming off the waitlist. There honestly doesn't seem to be a peer group left. DC was 99th percentile all around. Some of the kids pulled from the waitlist had lower scores. I realize there are other factors at play but it is frustrating. Our principal has emphasized that high achievers get split into different classrooms to achieve balance in each room.

Coming off the waitlist now? Isn't that too late?

FWIW, PP, I can relate. My child was also 99 percent all around and wasn't even waitlisted. I don't know what 'other factors' are in play here but it sure is not fair.

Didn’t the article mention they de-emphasized the standardized testing and emphasized student’s grades instead. It’s not unfair if other kids had higher grades than your kid.

Grades are a more subjective measure (some teachers give many As, others few), but there might have been significant differences in MAP scores. CES kids are often not just 99% for their grade but 99% 2-4 grades ahead in a given subject. Those are the outliers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm fine with universal screening, but using the cohort criteria really does exclude the brighter kids.

But don’t they get the advanced classes at their home school? I thought they send the kids who are advanced but there’s not enough (20?) other advanced kids at their school, and where there are enough kids to form a class they keep them at their home school? I’d prefer my kid be at the home school, unless the magnet is close.

No. If it was the exact same curriculum, then yes, but it's not the same curriculum, so no.. those one or two classes does not make a magnet program.

It does give them a peer group.

What good does that do if they are not getting the same exact curriculum as the magnet? They are getting a watered down version, and because they have a bigger cohort, they were not selected, but are missing out on the more challenging curriculum.

+1.