FCPS vs. MCPS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on tests that are influenced by prep. The population of both areas is similar. The main difference is AAP is top 15% wheat as MCPS GT is top 3%.

In MCPS, it's not that there are fewer gifted kids or that only the best of the best are in the gifted program. It's that most gifted kids are in gen ed because they didn't get into the too-small small program.

The MCPS program used to just be focused on outlier kids that could not be accommodated at the home school...no intention of included every "gifted' kids (whatever that its). Now they are expanding the program so some of the home school programs have 30% of all kids. It will be more like FCPS within the decade.

There are some local centers at the elementary that do this and others that do not. The policy isn't consistent or been expanded. You're just making wild guesses about this. Nevertheless, I don't personally think it's a bad thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on tests that are influenced by prep. The population of both areas is similar. The main difference is AAP is top 15% wheat as MCPS GT is top 3%.

In MCPS, it's not that there are fewer gifted kids or that only the best of the best are in the gifted program. It's that most gifted kids are in gen ed because they didn't get into the too-small small program.

The MCPS program used to just be focused on outlier kids that could not be accommodated at the home school...no intention of included every "gifted' kids (whatever that its). Now they are expanding the program so some of the home school programs have 30% of all kids. It will be more like FCPS within the decade.

And with the change, the "peer cohort" in the MCPS magnet programs have also changed. It's no longer the top 2 to 3%. Even some of the magnet teachers have stated that they have noticed that more of the kids in the program need more support now because of a wider range of abilities.

At least with AAP, the top 2 to 3% get in. None of the peer cohort nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on tests that are influenced by prep. The population of both areas is similar. The main difference is AAP is top 15% wheat as MCPS GT is top 3%.

In MCPS, it's not that there are fewer gifted kids or that only the best of the best are in the gifted program. It's that most gifted kids are in gen ed because they didn't get into the too-small small program.

The MCPS program used to just be focused on outlier kids that could not be accommodated at the home school...no intention of included every "gifted' kids (whatever that its). Now they are expanding the program so some of the home school programs have 30% of all kids. It will be more like FCPS within the decade.

And with the change, the "peer cohort" in the MCPS magnet programs have also changed. It's no longer the top 2 to 3%. Even some of the magnet teachers have stated that they have noticed that more of the kids in the program need more support now because of a wider range of abilities.

At least with AAP, the top 2 to 3% get in. None of the peer cohort nonsense.

That's total nonsense. The peer cohort criteria simply factor for differences between schools to better identify actual outliers. This is realtively minor compared to the chanes brought about by increasing the applicant pool tenfold with universal screening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on tests that are influenced by prep. The population of both areas is similar. The main difference is AAP is top 15% wheat as MCPS GT is top 3%.

In MCPS, it's not that there are fewer gifted kids or that only the best of the best are in the gifted program. It's that most gifted kids are in gen ed because they didn't get into the too-small small program.

The MCPS program used to just be focused on outlier kids that could not be accommodated at the home school...no intention of included every "gifted' kids (whatever that its). Now they are expanding the program so some of the home school programs have 30% of all kids. It will be more like FCPS within the decade.

And with the change, the "peer cohort" in the MCPS magnet programs have also changed. It's no longer the top 2 to 3%. Even some of the magnet teachers have stated that they have noticed that more of the kids in the program need more support now because of a wider range of abilities.

At least with AAP, the top 2 to 3% get in. None of the peer cohort nonsense.

That's total nonsense. The peer cohort criteria simply factor for differences between schools to better identify actual outliers. This is realtively minor compared to the chanes brought about by increasing the applicant pool tenfold with universal screening.

True the old system failed to capture the top 2$-3% because only a small fraction of eligible students even applied. The cohort changes also better identify outliers than was possible with the old system which mainly identified the well prepped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on tests that are influenced by prep. The population of both areas is similar. The main difference is AAP is top 15% wheat as MCPS GT is top 3%.

In MCPS, it's not that there are fewer gifted kids or that only the best of the best are in the gifted program. It's that most gifted kids are in gen ed because they didn't get into the too-small small program.

The MCPS program used to just be focused on outlier kids that could not be accommodated at the home school...no intention of included every "gifted' kids (whatever that its). Now they are expanding the program so some of the home school programs have 30% of all kids. It will be more like FCPS within the decade.

And with the change, the "peer cohort" in the MCPS magnet programs have also changed. It's no longer the top 2 to 3%. Even some of the magnet teachers have stated that they have noticed that more of the kids in the program need more support now because of a wider range of abilities.

At least with AAP, the top 2 to 3% get in. None of the peer cohort nonsense.

That's total nonsense. The peer cohort criteria simply factor for differences between schools to better identify actual outliers. This is realtively minor compared to the chanes brought about by increasing the applicant pool tenfold with universal screening.

True the old system failed to capture the top 2$-3% because only a small fraction of eligible students even applied. The cohort changes also better identify outliers than was possible with the old system which mainly identified the well prepped.

I think the bigger change are the school based programs. They have to fill a whole class or two whole classes in larger schools. That is a completely different process. I think kids from those schools should still be able to apply to regional centers.

[Anonymous]

No matter what MCPS does people are going to complain. If they expand the magnets, they're watering down the program for undeserving unwashed masses. If they don't admit more people, the admission criteria are somehow flawed. Either people complain. Personally, my kids have a first-rate education because of the special programs which they had no problem getting into so it's possible I'm biased.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on tests that are influenced by prep. The population of both areas is similar. The main difference is AAP is top 15% wheat as MCPS GT is top 3%.

In MCPS, it's not that there are fewer gifted kids or that only the best of the best are in the gifted program. It's that most gifted kids are in gen ed because they didn't get into the too-small small program.

The MCPS program used to just be focused on outlier kids that could not be accommodated at the home school...no intention of included every "gifted' kids (whatever that its). Now they are expanding the program so some of the home school programs have 30% of all kids. It will be more like FCPS within the decade.

And with the change, the "peer cohort" in the MCPS magnet programs have also changed. It's no longer the top 2 to 3%. Even some of the magnet teachers have stated that they have noticed that more of the kids in the program need more support now because of a wider range of abilities.

At least with AAP, the top 2 to 3% get in. None of the peer cohort nonsense.

That's total nonsense. The peer cohort criteria simply factor for differences between schools to better identify actual outliers. This is realtively minor compared to the chanes brought about by increasing the applicant pool tenfold with universal screening.

Nonsense.. peer cohort is *exactly* why we aren't getting the very top 2 to 3% in magnet anymore.. It's the top 2-3% of the school, not the entire county. It's worse than AAP. At least AAP pretty much guarantees top 2 to 3% will be admitted because they don't have the peer cohort nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No matter what MCPS does people are going to complain. If they expand the magnets, they're watering down the program for undeserving unwashed masses. If they don't admit more people, the admission criteria are somehow flawed. Either people complain. Personally, my kids have a first-rate education because of the special programs which they had no problem getting into so it's possible I'm biased.

yes you're biased. If the *exact* program at tpms were brought to every MS that has a sizeable high performing group, there would be no complaints. But that's not what they did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on tests that are influenced by prep. The population of both areas is similar. The main difference is AAP is top 15% wheat as MCPS GT is top 3%.

In MCPS, it's not that there are fewer gifted kids or that only the best of the best are in the gifted program. It's that most gifted kids are in gen ed because they didn't get into the too-small small program.

The MCPS program used to just be focused on outlier kids that could not be accommodated at the home school...no intention of included every "gifted' kids (whatever that its). Now they are expanding the program so some of the home school programs have 30% of all kids. It will be more like FCPS within the decade.

And with the change, the "peer cohort" in the MCPS magnet programs have also changed. It's no longer the top 2 to 3%. Even some of the magnet teachers have stated that they have noticed that more of the kids in the program need more support now because of a wider range of abilities.

At least with AAP, the top 2 to 3% get in. None of the peer cohort nonsense.

That's total nonsense. The peer cohort criteria simply factor for differences between schools to better identify actual outliers. This is realtively minor compared to the chanes brought about by increasing the applicant pool tenfold with universal screening.

True the old system failed to capture the top 2$-3% because only a small fraction of eligible students even applied. The cohort changes also better identify outliers than was possible with the old system which mainly identified the well prepped.

No one has a problem with universal screening, but the top 3% in one school could be in the 15% at another school, which is not high performing when you look at the entire county. MCPS stopped publishing the median scores of accepted students, and they even admitted that performance is based on peer cohort at the home school, not the entire county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on tests that are influenced by prep. The population of both areas is similar. The main difference is AAP is top 15% wheat as MCPS GT is top 3%.

In MCPS, it's not that there are fewer gifted kids or that only the best of the best are in the gifted program. It's that most gifted kids are in gen ed because they didn't get into the too-small small program.

The MCPS program used to just be focused on outlier kids that could not be accommodated at the home school...no intention of included every "gifted' kids (whatever that its). Now they are expanding the program so some of the home school programs have 30% of all kids. It will be more like FCPS within the decade.

And with the change, the "peer cohort" in the MCPS magnet programs have also changed. It's no longer the top 2 to 3%. Even some of the magnet teachers have stated that they have noticed that more of the kids in the program need more support now because of a wider range of abilities.

At least with AAP, the top 2 to 3% get in. None of the peer cohort nonsense.

That's total nonsense. The peer cohort criteria simply factor for differences between schools to better identify actual outliers. This is realtively minor compared to the chanes brought about by increasing the applicant pool tenfold with universal screening.

No it isn't. Don't show up and lie on the general school education cite.
MCPS is ON RECORD stating their sole goal was to racially diversify their gifted and talented, and magnet programs.
First they changed the name of the ES programs from Highly Gifted Centers to "Centers for Excellence. Then they remade the APPLICATION process to test ALL students in 3rd grade. Then, the real kick in the teeth, they remade the SELECTION process to heavily weight "peer cohort" and also hide CoGat test scores. Though one doc said 80%+ will be considered, especially if no "peer cohort." What is "peer cohort"? Well its now a heavily negative factor where if your 3rd grade has more than 20 kids scoring about 80% or 90% (and many ES have over 100 kids out of 150 scoring in the 90s) you will be discounted and the seat will go for a kid with 80%+ from a school with lots of underperforms.

Voila, No Bethesda and Potomac admits, way more Silver Spring, Takoma Park, Wheaton admits.

Meanwhile, Central Office does NOTHING to improve its K-8 curriculum that a private assessment charged them to totally change. Not challenging its top quartile students at all at MCPS. Just focuses on the bottom half.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on tests that are influenced by prep. The population of both areas is similar. The main difference is AAP is top 15% wheat as MCPS GT is top 3%.

In MCPS, it's not that there are fewer gifted kids or that only the best of the best are in the gifted program. It's that most gifted kids are in gen ed because they didn't get into the too-small small program.

The MCPS program used to just be focused on outlier kids that could not be accommodated at the home school...no intention of included every "gifted' kids (whatever that its). Now they are expanding the program so some of the home school programs have 30% of all kids. It will be more like FCPS within the decade.

And with the change, the "peer cohort" in the MCPS magnet programs have also changed. It's no longer the top 2 to 3%. Even some of the magnet teachers have stated that they have noticed that more of the kids in the program need more support now because of a wider range of abilities.

At least with AAP, the top 2 to 3% get in. None of the peer cohort nonsense.

That's total nonsense. The peer cohort criteria simply factor for differences between schools to better identify actual outliers. This is realtively minor compared to the chanes brought about by increasing the applicant pool tenfold with universal screening.

No it isn't. Don't show up and lie on the general school education cite.
MCPS is ON RECORD stating their sole goal was to racially diversify their gifted and talented, and magnet programs.
First they changed the name of the ES programs from Highly Gifted Centers to "Centers for Excellence. Then they remade the APPLICATION process to test ALL students in 3rd grade. Then, the real kick in the teeth, they remade the SELECTION process to heavily weight "peer cohort" and also hide CoGat test scores. Though one doc said 80%+ will be considered, especially if no "peer cohort." What is "peer cohort"? Well its now a heavily negative factor where if your 3rd grade has more than 20 kids scoring about 80% or 90% (and many ES have over 100 kids out of 150 scoring in the 90s) you will be discounted and the seat will go for a kid with 80%+ from a school with lots of underperforms.

Voila, No Bethesda and Potomac admits, way more Silver Spring, Takoma Park, Wheaton admits.

Meanwhile, Central Office does NOTHING to improve its K-8 curriculum that a private assessment charged them to totally change. Not challenging its top quartile students at all at MCPS. Just focuses on the bottom half.

You know that there is a cream for that, right ?

[Anonymous]

Well regardless of how much mcps posters insult each other to defend mcps, the fact is mcps is all about "racial equity" and the "achievement gap" and gives short-shrift to education of gifted kids, high performing kids, or even a rigorous curriculum. Compared to FCPS that is a recipe for disaster if you have intelligent and hard working but gifted kids. Especially if these kids are of the "wrong" ethnicity. Moreover, there is a condescension and opaqueness on the part of the mcps educrats that really takes away any rational basis for planning for your child's education or experience in the system.

Overall from the parents point of view, if you are upper middle class no question FCPS is the better option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well regardless of how much mcps posters insult each other to defend mcps, the fact is mcps is all about "racial equity" and the "achievement gap" and gives short-shrift to education of gifted kids, high performing kids, or even a rigorous curriculum. Compared to FCPS that is a recipe for disaster if you have intelligent and hard working but gifted kids. Especially if these kids are of the "wrong" ethnicity. Moreover, there is a condescension and opaqueness on the part of the mcps educrats that really takes away any rational basis for planning for your child's education or experience in the system.

Overall from the parents point of view, if you are upper middle class no question FCPS is the better option.

Curious why MCPS prestige programs destroy VA's AAP/magnets in every academic measure?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well regardless of how much mcps posters insult each other to defend mcps, the fact is mcps is all about "racial equity" and the "achievement gap" and gives short-shrift to education of gifted kids, high performing kids, or even a rigorous curriculum. Compared to FCPS that is a recipe for disaster if you have intelligent and hard working but gifted kids. Especially if these kids are of the "wrong" ethnicity. Moreover, there is a condescension and opaqueness on the part of the mcps educrats that really takes away any rational basis for planning for your child's education or experience in the system.

Overall from the parents point of view, if you are upper middle class no question FCPS is the better option.

Curious why MCPS prestige programs destroy VA's AAP/magnets in every academic measure?

They don't. This is another suburban myth from mcps backers who are 50 years behind in information.

[Anonymous]

I love how people in both school districts will bash their own districts on the MD and VA school forums, but when it come to MD versus VA, all of a sudden people fall in love with their own district (and bash the other one).