Middle school magnet lottery cutoffs finally revealed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Double the size of these programs. Adding more seats will all students. Creating more centers will also reduce transportation costs to where it's a wash. Also, if you want to ensure the best students from each school are selected, ditch the lottery and pick the best students from each school.

Duplicate schools like Banneker in DC. Banneker’s students are not wholly academically “gifted” by test score, but they are all highly academically motivated and ambitious and the school does a great job of preparing them for college. Banneker basically scoops up all the academically focused kids who are on or above grade level from DCPS high schools where literally 0% are on grade level. As well, charters like KIPP, DCI, and DC Prep do a good job with these kids. But I imagine MCPS “equity” advocates would poop their pants at the notion that charters can increase opportunities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this is equity sh*t right?

Absolutely, but even worse, it makes students with the highest scores, who DO NOT win the lottery, feel really terrible about themselves. This was my daughter's situation a couple of years ago.
I am against the lottery, even if the cut-off was similar at all schools, just because it's not a fair system. You can't have a large range of scores that are entered into a hat, then pick a lower scorer over a higher scorer. You could possibly do this if the hat was all 99% and above, maaaybe? But it's really frustrating when a 90th percentile gets in, and the 99th percentile doesn't. There is a big difference in critical thinking between those two scores. DD has always had scores within the 99th percentile. Kids like her are why magnets were created. And yet she has to go to her home school, where I had to fight to get her into an advanced math class, because we're in a cluster that doesn't like accelerating students, even though she did well on her placement test and found the class really easy.

In general, we are happy with MCPS, but this particular part of it really maddening.

Look, I'm in the same boat as you with a rising sixth grader who has consistently scored in the 99th percentile, went to CES, and didn't get selected from the lottery. And yes, it sucks, but it's definitely not any less fair than our kids getting in because they happen to have been born into families with the resources to support them.

And the fact that she has someone in her life who 1) knows how to and 2) is willing to fight to get her into advanced math is a pretty good indicator that she will be OK in her home school. Not all students have that.

My 5th grader who scored in 280s on their MAPs which is 30 points over the 99th percentile wasn't selected, but several kids from the CES with much lower stats were.

I'm not into turning this into a hunger games competition or making it a windfall for the prep industry either.

They just need to increase the number of seats so kids who score in the top 2% who are interested in these programs can participate.

Yes, that's going to happen, because test scores aren't a gold standard indicator of which kids most need those seats. They definitely need to increase the number of seats, but not just for the top 2%. They need to have enough seats for all kids who can do the work. That's a huge lift, but it should be the goal.

I don't understand why the "pie" can't be bigger either. Despite an increase in school age population they have not added MS magnet seats downcountry. I assume part of the problem is space. Maybe it is optics too.

I think the reality is that these exclusive programs have run their course. The original purpose was to stop white flight in east county. Then the Asians took them over. They should get rid of the programs and focus gifted resources at the individual school level. After the pilot in 2017ish data was released that showed most middle schools had enough kids to have a gifted cohort. For the small percentage of kids who can not served at their home school, they can bus those kids to other schools where a cohort does exist. We already have a significant amount of bussing in the DCC. What is a little bit more?

The schools don’t want gifted cohorts. Mixed-ability classrooms are the rage. Magnets are an unprincipled exception to this trend, and while they can’t be eliminated for optical reasons, they can be diluted into irrelevance.

These programs aren’t about making Harper the best antitrust attorney or cardiologist she can be when she’s already doing really well. They’re about expanding opportunities for kids, including poor black and brown ones, who wouldn’t otherwise have them at their home schools.

Except is that what they are doing? I think what is actually happening is that equity advocates are lazily latching on to the magnets to try to show they are “expanding opportunities.” What would actually expand opportunities would be to improve the FARMS schools and ensure that all the kids there can read and do math, and provide appropriate challenge and support to the on grade-level kids.

The problem with high FARMS schools is that their parents are struggling with day-to-day living. There is no easy solution - and the local school system is not in any position to do anything about poverty in neighborhoods with poor transportation, few places to work, no grocery stores, etc. The only thing the local school system could maybe do is pull out the exceptional / talented kids and give them a chance at a better school.

But as soon as they do that then families at low FARMS schools will insist on applying the same standards. In the end, after all of the arguing and lawsuits, the only kids who get hosed are the talented ones growing up in poor neighborhoods. Nothing new under the sun, right?

[Anonymous]

The original point of magnet programs was to bring high income well educated people to lower performing schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those are really low MAP scores even in the lowest FARMS group. When the lottery was first used I remember so many posters claiming there's very little difference in performance between high FARMS and low FARMS schools. They literally said it can't be more than a few percentages despite all the evidence to the contrary.

People get so stuck on this idea that they don't want to offend anyone by claiming there are differences in achievement but now you have it. There are huge differences.

People have realized that the only way to attain “equity” is by holding high-performing students back. This policy attains that outcome precisely. Talented students from low FARMS schools are excluded from the program, and including less-prepared students from high FARMS schools will dilute and slow down the magnet program for all. This will reduce the population-level gap, and thus improves equity, which is the overwhelming priority for educators.

If and when talented kids from high FARMS schools get left out it is precisely because there is a lottery and their name was not drawn.
If and when talented kids from low FARMS schools get left out it is precisely because there is a lottery and their name was not drawn.

Yes, it does a crummy job of selecting the students who need these programs most. A top kid from a high-farms school likely doesn't even have a solid cohort. This fails them. The top kids from a low-farms school at least have a decent cohort and will likely be okay but again these programs need to focus on students and their needs instead of political trends.

Excellent point. Not only does the lottery get rid of an actual gifted program, but it also diminishes the opportunities for actually gifted kids of color. Meanwhile the equity advocates get to pat themselves on the back, which is all they care about.

I mean, it's not like the previous system was serving poor/working class kids or kids of color all that well, either. Arguably, a process that gives gifted kids from high FARMS schools any chance of admission is better than the previous process that all but shut them out with gatekeeping measures like Saturday testing, at-home essays, and points for extracurricular activities.

Agreed. The previous system left out a lot of poor/working class kids, but the people who are now complaining didn't care about that then. Now as we work our way towards an approach that can include more students (especially students who are at a disadvantage), some of these parents feel like they are losing something...I wonder what that 'something' is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The original point of magnet programs was to bring high income well educated people to lower performing schools.

No. The point of the magnet was to serve kids who were outliers in their home schools. The decision to place the magnets in integrated schools was an attempt to counteract white flight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The original point of magnet programs was to bring high income well educated people to lower performing schools.

No. The point of the magnet was to serve kids who were outliers in their home schools. The decision to place the magnets in integrated schools was an attempt to counteract white flight.

OK, pretty sure we are saying the same thing. In any event it was not to promote equity. Now that the purpose of society has shifted, there is a mismatch between expectations and the reality. It’s unfortunate but the kids are stuck with a less rigorous education as a result.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Double the size of these programs. Adding more seats will all students. Creating more centers will also reduce transportation costs to where it's a wash. Also, if you want to ensure the best students from each school are selected, ditch the lottery and pick the best students from each school.

I think the point is being missed that MCPS is trying to do away with magnet programs and focus on providing enrichment at the local school level. In that context, they have drammatically expanded seats. The current system, however, does not provide enough enrichment - Math, social studies, and foreign language offerings at the MS level, only. The kids are stuck at a stultifying level in English, Science and electives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The original point of magnet programs was to bring high income well educated people to lower performing schools.

No. The point of the magnet was to serve kids who were outliers in their home schools. The decision to place the magnets in integrated schools was an attempt to counteract white flight.

OK, pretty sure we are saying the same thing. In any event it was not to promote equity. Now that the purpose of society has shifted, there is a mismatch between expectations and the reality. It’s unfortunate but the kids are stuck with a less rigorous education as a result.

Don't think so. They said it was to serve outliers but was historically located at schools to prevent white flight in decades past.

[Anonymous]

Lotteries don't serve equity either. They're just too random.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Responding to MPIAs from MCCPTA's Gifted Education Committee, MCPS finally revealed middle school magnet lottery cutoffs.

(1) MCPS divides all elementary schools into 5 groups based on FARMS:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/120BRtShXf9_kQcNvKSxHKG4nJhnyTjL7/view?fbclid=IwAR1hrS0Ar1xsi_W8Ew3ow3Zz6aE84gkeAVZTu08rz_33TCvXCfTSRLDtX_w

low
low moderate
moderate
moderate high
high

(2) MCPS uses different cutoffs for these 5 groups:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1e0Szg2jJ8F1rL2BZSqCV1fb_R1gLwaRl/view?fbclid=IwAR36sMGZsbuKGYKnvEj9f5B2o0ioaZeiaZ7YQJLJVxPxP_m-Jr9-tUG5wq8

The cutoffs are national normed percentile (= 85% locally normed)

Math
low 93%
low moderate 92%
moderate 84%
moderate high 65%
high 60%

Humanites
low 92%
low moderate 92%
moderate 88%
moderate high 76%
high 70%


This means in a low-FARMS school, one needs 93%/92% to enter lottery.
In a high-FARMS school, one needs 60%/70% to enter lottery.

You can score 60% in math and 70% in reading to go to Takoma Park and Eastern magnets.

What percentage of the kids at a high-farms school have 70%+?

At least 60-70% of the students in high farms would have the scores to make the cut off

No. It's saying kids who attend high farms schools and score at least 70%ile on the test are in-pool.

It's not the same as scoring 99%ile, but at a lot of high farms schools the barriers to learning and achievement are greater, so what MCPS is saying is that a kid who scores 70%ile at a high farms schools, at age 8, demonstrates the same potential academically as a kid who scores a 95%ile at a W feeder. Which having been at both, I do think sounds fair.

If you hate this I can see that. But it's equitable. Equitable measures being introduced may mean that certain people's odds change. I don't take issues with this, but I do think a blind lottery post-cutoff is a mistake. It is meaningful to have teachers weigh in on things, and the outcomes for equity can be increased without resorting to straight up lottery. In the end though, what MCPS needs is increased access to enrichment for way more children, and perhaps they should consider re-adding a selective process for these more selective cohorts of highly capable kids (and yes, my kid was admitted to two of those in the past, so I can speak to the quality - they were/are excellent).

+2 I'll add that folks on this very site were claiming within recent memory that a 99th percentile kid couldn't possibly be expected to learn alongside a 95th percentile kid.

While I do think that 60th percentile is too low, I'd note that the schools in that category are among the absolute poorest in the district. It is not, as previously assumed, every single Title I school. It's the schools where the overwhelming majority of kids are living in poverty and/or have experienced trauma. Scoring a 70th percentile under those circumstances may well demonstrate more potential than a kid scoring in the 93rd percentile with every advantage possible.

Or it may not. Likely someone looked at the score distribution from these schools and said "that's the top x%," sure. But it is hard to say that it's equity without some deeper dive into the data and surrounding circumstances, which I doubt MCPS did. That said, someone leaked this data from the MCCPTA g/t listserv pretty darn fast. Take, tsk.

I don't think the listserv is there to keep info from folks. More to let folks who signed up know something relevant. Usually along with a request to share that info broadly with their communities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lotteries don't serve equity either. They're just too random.

Randomsess is less gameable. As to whether the identification of students to add to the lottery pool is gameable, or even properly designed prior to any gaming, that is debatable, and evaluation of it depends in large part on the undelying objectives assumed.

[Anonymous]

Is it really equitable though? There are dis-advantaged kids at low FARMS schools and highly advantaged kids at high FARMS schools.

[Anonymous]

There is a easy solution: start a GT class in local school where all students tested above 95or 93% are included.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lotteries don't serve equity either. They're just too random.

Randomsess is less gameable. As to whether the identification of students to add to the lottery pool is gameable, or even properly designed prior to any gaming, that is debatable, and evaluation of it depends in large part on the undelying objectives assumed.

What better serves equity is the use of local norms but still identifying the top kids at every school. Also more seats would help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it really equitable though? There are dis-advantaged kids at low FARMS schools and highly advantaged kids at high FARMS schools.

I'd imagine the top X% from each school would be equitable to everyone.