Do unmotivated kids get into HGC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because of the way they did that. They could have easily, with the same amount of money or less, increased the number of seats at the main centers.

Instead, they purposely chose to do pilot programs at schools that do not reflect the demographics of MCPS and where URMs are overrepresented. But this wasn't enough. They also had to change the admissions criteria so the test isn't the same as what was given to the rest of the students in the county in the past. But this wasn't enough either. So they had to add other criteria for selection beyond the tests and made them pretty vague.

At some point after trying to pull this lever and that lever they found a formula that would result in a higher percentage of URMs admitted and enrolled.

Don't kid yourself about what's going on. IMO I think the county should take more of its money and put it into after school, tutoring and enrichment programs for all FARMS children and those at Title I schools. I would even be for reducing the seats at the HGCs (because really how many of the kids actually NEED the program) if the money could be used instead to target those children who are disadvantaged from a socieoeconomic standpoint but show high intellectual ability or motivation.

Rachel Carson ES and Matsunaga ES, for example.

[Anonymous]

There are two different types of need being discussed here and they are both important. There is the very bright or gifted kid who may or may not be motivated and the very motivated child who may or may not be in the highest echelons in terms of raw ability.

The elementary HGCs used to target the first category and I would argue that for the MS and HS magnets you had to be both.

I agreed with this goal for the HGCs because in elementary a lot of your motivation comes from your parents and their ability to provide an environment that rewards being a good student. It can also have to do with maturity. Some children just take longer to mature and 3rd grade is really early to be able to tell who will be a good student and who won't. I know a lot of average elementary students who went on to go to the Ivy League. Children that age should be encouraged to their full potential.

By MS and HS kids are old enough to be guided more by their internal motivation and I don't think it's enough just to have a really high IQ in terms of being successful in a magnet program.

OP, Don't listen to some of the negative, self-righteous people on this thread. I think your child could do really well at one of the centers and wish you luck in applying!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of the way they did that. They could have easily, with the same amount of money or less, increased the number of seats at the main centers.

Instead, they purposely chose to do pilot programs at schools that do not reflect the demographics of MCPS and where URMs are overrepresented. But this wasn't enough. They also had to change the admissions criteria so the test isn't the same as what was given to the rest of the students in the county in the past. But this wasn't enough either. So they had to add other criteria for selection beyond the tests and made them pretty vague.

At some point after trying to pull this lever and that lever they found a formula that would result in a higher percentage of URMs admitted and enrolled.

Don't kid yourself about what's going on. IMO I think the county should take more of its money and put it into after school, tutoring and enrichment programs for all FARMS children and those at Title I schools. I would even be for reducing the seats at the HGCs (because really how many of the kids actually NEED the program) if the money could be used instead to target those children who are disadvantaged from a socieoeconomic standpoint but show high intellectual ability or motivation.

Rachel Carson ES and Matsunaga ES, for example.

You do realize that those schools do not have a high FARMS population and are not Title I schools right? They purpose chose schools that are more middle-class but have a high percentage of URMs. They are only 10-20% FARMS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of the way they did that. They could have easily, with the same amount of money or less, increased the number of seats at the main centers.

Instead, they purposely chose to do pilot programs at schools that do not reflect the demographics of MCPS and where URMs are overrepresented. But this wasn't enough. They also had to change the admissions criteria so the test isn't the same as what was given to the rest of the students in the county in the past. But this wasn't enough either. So they had to add other criteria for selection beyond the tests and made them pretty vague.

At some point after trying to pull this lever and that lever they found a formula that would result in a higher percentage of URMs admitted and enrolled.

Don't kid yourself about what's going on. IMO I think the county should take more of its money and put it into after school, tutoring and enrichment programs for all FARMS children and those at Title I schools. I would even be for reducing the seats at the HGCs (because really how many of the kids actually NEED the program) if the money could be used instead to target those children who are disadvantaged from a socieoeconomic standpoint but show high intellectual ability or motivation.

Rachel Carson ES and Matsunaga ES, for example.

You do realize that those schools do not have a high FARMS population and are not Title I schools right? They purpose chose schools that are more middle-class but have a high percentage of URMs. They are only 10-20% FARMS.

Rachel Carson does not have a high percentage of black, Hispanic, and poor students. Neither does Matsunaga. Find a different explanation, because this one doesn't fit the data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't remember where I saw the stats (I believe they were posted on this board), but MCPS increased the number of seats in the center program so dramatically this year that the numbers increased for every single subgroup. Yes, there are more URMs in the program this year, but there are also more whites and Asians than were admitted last year. There are more FARMs students and more who aren't part of the FARMs group. There are more children with IEPs and 504s, but there are also more kids without IEPs and 504s. Everybody's odds of being accepted increased. The number of previously underrepresented subgroups did not increase at anyone else's expense. I think a full 5% of this year's 4th graders were accepted, which is about 10% of the children who were chosen for the gifted testing last year in 3rd grade. People complain that the county doesn't give this opportunity to enough gifted children. Other people complain that the program has been "watered down" when more children are accepted. No matter what MCPS does, someone will find fault.

Barnsely HGC was already huge. If they increased it there, I hope they added a whole class and not just seats in the existing classes. Class would be huge.

I think you are talking about the pilot program in some of the ESs where they are creating "centers" within the school rather than sending the kids off to a different HGC.

Yes, the pilot program is responsible for opening many more seats, but i believe that those 4 schools with new local centers are not sending any children to the regional centers, which in turn opens up some additional spots for children at all the other schools.

Cold Spring, which I consider the most competitive of all the clusters given their test scores (usually by at least 10 points), did not open any additional seats or centers.

[Anonymous]

I really don't know how Matsunaga and Rachel Carson were chosen, but I assumed it had to do with their large size (they'd have enough high performers to fill gifted classes) and the fact that they have a good number of high performing URMs. I don't know how the cost of the local centers would compare to the cost of increasing the number of classes at regional centers, but I would think that the local centers are probably cheaper. Instead of busing dozens of children a greater distance, they're providing extra training to a handful of teachers.

[Anonymous]

Test scores and grades are both used in the selection process. Test scores can be used to figure out who is really gifted. Grades can be used to see who is really motivated. Kids who have great grades and high test scores probably have the best odds of getting in. It's not a perfect system because grades are subjective and some teachers are much more lenient with grades than others, and some kids may be highly gifted but perform terribly on tests due to learning disabilities, but what system would be perfect?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of the way they did that. They could have easily, with the same amount of money or less, increased the number of seats at the main centers.

Instead, they purposely chose to do pilot programs at schools that do not reflect the demographics of MCPS and where URMs are overrepresented. But this wasn't enough. They also had to change the admissions criteria so the test isn't the same as what was given to the rest of the students in the county in the past. But this wasn't enough either. So they had to add other criteria for selection beyond the tests and made them pretty vague.

At some point after trying to pull this lever and that lever they found a formula that would result in a higher percentage of URMs admitted and enrolled.

Don't kid yourself about what's going on. IMO I think the county should take more of its money and put it into after school, tutoring and enrichment programs for all FARMS children and those at Title I schools. I would even be for reducing the seats at the HGCs (because really how many of the kids actually NEED the program) if the money could be used instead to target those children who are disadvantaged from a socieoeconomic standpoint but show high intellectual ability or motivation.

Rachel Carson ES and Matsunaga ES, for example.

You do realize that those schools do not have a high FARMS population and are not Title I schools right? They purpose chose schools that are more middle-class but have a high percentage of URMs. They are only 10-20% FARMS.

Rachel Carson does not have a high percentage of black, Hispanic, and poor students. Neither does Matsunaga. Find a different explanation, because this one doesn't fit the data.

+1 Also, picking these schools to increase URM participation could not close the achievement gap. Look at the data. The only thing MCPS could possibly have done is increase the number of URM participation in magnet programs, per the Metis report. This is different than closing the achievement gap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because of the way they did that. They could have easily, with the same amount of money or less, increased the number of seats at the main centers.

Instead, they purposely chose to do pilot programs at schools that do not reflect the demographics of MCPS and where URMs are overrepresented. But this wasn't enough. They also had to change the admissions criteria so the test isn't the same as what was given to the rest of the students in the county in the past. But this wasn't enough either. So they had to add other criteria for selection beyond the tests and made them pretty vague.

At some point after trying to pull this lever and that lever they found a formula that would result in a higher percentage of URMs admitted and enrolled.

Don't kid yourself about what's going on. IMO I think the county should take more of its money and put it into after school, tutoring and enrichment programs for all FARMS children and those at Title I schools. I would even be for reducing the seats at the HGCs (because really how many of the kids actually NEED the program) if the money could be used instead to target those children who are disadvantaged from a socieoeconomic standpoint but show high intellectual ability or motivation.

Rachel Carson ES and Matsunaga ES, for example.

You do realize that those schools do not have a high FARMS population and are not Title I schools right? They purpose chose schools that are more middle-class but have a high percentage of URMs. They are only 10-20% FARMS.

Rachel Carson does not have a high percentage of black, Hispanic, and poor students. Neither does Matsunaga. Find a different explanation, because this one doesn't fit the data.

+1 Also, picking these schools to increase URM participation could not close the achievement gap. Look at the data. The only thing MCPS could possibly have done is increase the number of URM participation in magnet programs, per the Metis report. This is different than closing the achievement gap.

I have tried to explain that to a poster on a different thread (same poster?) and they don't seem to understand the difference....

[Anonymous]

Oh my gosh - this thread totally demonstrates why teacher recommendations have been eliminated from the process. People don't understand the reality of gifted children and expect them to be well-behaved, motivated students. A child who is not motivated in the home school may be the perfect candidate for the CES because the lack of motivation is caused by complete and utter boredom. Not every child is, or should be, able to mask their emotions and needs like a Stepford kid. of gifted children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't remember where I saw the stats (I believe they were posted on this board), but MCPS increased the number of seats in the center program so dramatically this year that the numbers increased for every single subgroup. Yes, there are more URMs in the program this year, but there are also more whites and Asians than were admitted last year. There are more FARMs students and more who aren't part of the FARMs group. There are more children with IEPs and 504s, but there are also more kids without IEPs and 504s. Everybody's odds of being accepted increased. The number of previously underrepresented subgroups did not increase at anyone else's expense. I think a full 5% of this year's 4th graders were accepted, which is about 10% of the children who were chosen for the gifted testing last year in 3rd grade. People complain that the county doesn't give this opportunity to enough gifted children. Other people complain that the program has been "watered down" when more children are accepted. No matter what MCPS does, someone will find fault.

Barnsely HGC was already huge. If they increased it there, I hope they added a whole class and not just seats in the existing classes. Class would be huge.

I think you are talking about the pilot program in some of the ESs where they are creating "centers" within the school rather than sending the kids off to a different HGC.

This year the Barnsley HGC has 3 classes. Not sure how many there have been in the past.

Each class has about 26-28 students, AFAIK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anything that talks about diversity/gaps etc is talking about watering down the application process.

This is true only if you believe that the only way to increase participation by black, Hispanic, and/or poor kids is to admit unqualified black, Hispanic, and/or poor students and exclude non-black, non-Hispanic, and/or non-poor qualified students. Do you believe that? I don't.

This is what happens in colleges and it’s trickling down to lower school levels.

The schools want to attract a certain number of AA and Latino students so they bring them in even if they are somewhat less qualified.

When I was in grad school, we had such a program. They brought in about a dozen URMs. Held a special free summer session to get the students up to speed. Offered extra financial aid. Ended up that only 3 of those students finished the program. It was fairly obvious that in the name of ‘diversity’ they were accepting students who really were not qualified to be there.

I posted this but I also want to be clear that I do not think that AA and Latino students are less qualified as a whole. My point is more than when the focus goes to ‘increasing diversity’ or ‘closing the achievement gap’ then often times programs end up letting in less qualified students to fulfill that requirement.

this is the inconvenient truth. There are many ways to help URM students to achieve higher, but the school systems often don't want to take the hard road. watering down (changing the grading system, adding more holistic factors in special program admission, ...) is the easiest and quickest.

I agree with this PP. That's what MCPS seems to be doing. And, I also agree that it would be more beneficial to the URM population to offer more resources such as smaller class sizes, and additional support versus pushing those students into the HGCs or pushing them into Compacted Math (as is being done at some schools, where every student ends up in CM).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I agree with this PP. That's what MCPS seems to be doing. And, I also agree that it would be more beneficial to the URM population to offer more resources such as smaller class sizes, and additional support versus pushing those students into the HGCs or pushing them into Compacted Math (as is being done at some schools, where every student ends up in CM).

You know what's beneficial to bright kids who are Hispanic/poor/black? Having the same access to MCPS special programs as bright kids who aren't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I agree with this PP. That's what MCPS seems to be doing. And, I also agree that it would be more beneficial to the URM population to offer more resources such as smaller class sizes, and additional support versus pushing those students into the HGCs or pushing them into Compacted Math (as is being done at some schools, where every student ends up in CM).

You know what's beneficial to bright kids who are Hispanic/poor/black? Having the same access to MCPS special programs as bright kids who aren't.

Living with their mother and father. That's beneficial to all kids. More than any taxpayer-funded 7am to 6pm school program in the world. You simply cannot outsource parenting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I agree with this PP. That's what MCPS seems to be doing. And, I also agree that it would be more beneficial to the URM population to offer more resources such as smaller class sizes, and additional support versus pushing those students into the HGCs or pushing them into Compacted Math (as is being done at some schools, where every student ends up in CM).

You know what's beneficial to bright kids who are Hispanic/poor/black? Having the same access to MCPS special programs as bright kids who aren't.

Living with their mother and father. That's beneficial to all kids. More than any taxpayer-funded 7am to 6pm school program in the world. You simply cannot outsource parenting.

What does this have to do with the admissions process for the Centers for Enriched Studies?