mcps. sounds about right. (GT admissions changes)

[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.

It's not all or nothing. They're getting a more challenging curriculum (this is good), at their home school (this is also good).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Those are the outliers, but in school they were not. I know the kid who got in from DC's class, whatever the hell they meant by 'outliers' that was not the case!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

I think the reduction in Asian students is solely due to the fact that there is a large Asian community clustered in one particular ES/MS. They got caught by the new home school peer group policy.

When we attended the TP orientation 3 years ago, the magnet coordinator mentioned that 2 buses were required to pick up all the kids who get on at Cold Spring elementary (granted this would include both MS and HS magnet kid).

Self segregation by these Asian families is what impacted their kids odds at the MS magnet program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

I think the reduction in Asian students is solely due to the fact that there is a large Asian community clustered in one particular ES/MS. They got caught by the new home school peer group policy.

When we attended the TP orientation 3 years ago, the magnet coordinator mentioned that 2 buses were required to pick up all the kids who get on at Cold Spring elementary (granted this would include both MS and HS magnet kid).

Self segregation by these Asian families is what impacted their kids odds at the MS magnet program.

\

Yes, that is true. Asian families predominate at Cold Spring ES, and as a result were heavily penalized by the new "high achieving peer cohort" policy. Those kids test off the charts, but are with a sizable group of kids who score similarly so there were almost no MS magnet admissions last year as a result. Fortunately, their kids are zoned for outstanding home schools and will indeed have peers in their advanced/enriched classes there. Some of those kids tested into Algebra, so will be able to work a full 2 years ahead in math. They'll be fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It's not all or nothing. They're getting a more challenging curriculum (this is good), at their home school (this is also good).

Now I would really like for someone to explain it to me in a layperson's terms. I understand the concept of 'outliers' but children from our elementary (at least the few we know personally) who were selected for the CES are not Stephen Hawkings in the making. I can vouch for that. All these children come from similar backgrounds (no one is disadvantaged), they were all attending prep classes and they all scored high on Cogat. I agree that the difference might lie in a couple of MAP percentage points, but there is no way any of them is 3 grades ahead of the class. No way.

Fast forward to this September, these children are called 'peerless outliers' and are bussed to this wonderful program where they are taught this wonderful enriched curriculum so that their 'needs' are met. But what about my child whose 'needs' are not being met because we didn't sign her up for A plus and her MAPs in math were comparatively lower?

What I would really like to see is transparency in selection process. And if it is a lottery amongst children who ,say, scored 98 and higher on the test and are in 95% percentile MAP-wise, why doesn't the county just say so?

[Anonymous]

On a philosophical level, I understand why MCPS is emphasizing the need for including more minorities in the gifted education program for Montgomery county students. But as a parent of a kid who went through the magnet and who is now a senior at MIT, i feel sad that the entire purpose of the magnet is being redirected. For my kid, the magnet was life changing. THe opportunity to meet kids who are passionate about math and science and who had the opportunity to participate on the math team starting in middle school and to be inspired by classes and stimulating opportunities was a life changing experience. Would his life be ok if he hadn’t been in the magnet ... sure. But I think that Montgomery County will no longer be serving the needs of the highly gifted students in the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On a philosophical level, I understand why MCPS is emphasizing the need for including more minorities in the gifted education program for Montgomery county students. But as a parent of a kid who went through the magnet and who is now a senior at MIT, i feel sad that the entire purpose of the magnet is being redirected. For my kid, the magnet was life changing. THe opportunity to meet kids who are passionate about math and science and who had the opportunity to participate on the math team starting in middle school and to be inspired by classes and stimulating opportunities was a life changing experience. Would his life be ok if he hadn’t been in the magnet ... sure. But I think that Montgomery County will no longer be serving the needs of the highly gifted students in the county.

Exactly. They steer the direction to serve "bright" kids while this curriculum is designed for "highly gifted" kids. So both sides will suffer, oh wait, three sides, including the local forced-to-teach-magnet-curriculum-without-enough-training teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On a philosophical level, I understand why MCPS is emphasizing the need for including more minorities in the gifted education program for Montgomery county students. But as a parent of a kid who went through the magnet and who is now a senior at MIT, i feel sad that the entire purpose of the magnet is being redirected. For my kid, the magnet was life changing. THe opportunity to meet kids who are passionate about math and science and who had the opportunity to participate on the math team starting in middle school and to be inspired by classes and stimulating opportunities was a life changing experience. Would his life be ok if he hadn’t been in the magnet ... sure. But I think that Montgomery County will no longer be serving the needs of the highly gifted students in the county.

It's not. The purpose of the magnets is still to serve the needs of the highly gifted students in the county. It's just now that they're expanding the net.

It's not like, the more black and Hispanic gifted students included in the magnet, the less passion there will be among magnet kids about math and science. Though there certainly do seem to be people who believe that that's the case.

[Anonymous]

To the PP who said CES kids are "often" 99th percentile at 2-4 grades ahead:

1. There's no way the established evaluation criteria can capture that. The most you can see is that a kid is at the 99th percentile among kids his/her age. You can also see that the kid is reading ahead of grade level, but that doesn't firmly establish that the kid is 99th percentile at 2-4 grades ahead.

2. You don't understand exactly how rare it is for a kid to be performing at the top of the curve 2-4 grades ahead. That would mean a 4th grader would be able to test ahead of nearly all 8th graders. While such people exist, to say that's how to "often" describe CES kids falls into the typical DCUM trap of thinking gifted kids in this area are somehow lightyears ahead of anyone else. It's simply not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It's not all or nothing. They're getting a more challenging curriculum (this is good), at their home school (this is also good).

Now I would really like for someone to explain it to me in a layperson's terms. I understand the concept of 'outliers' but children from our elementary (at least the few we know personally) who were selected for the CES are not Stephen Hawkings in the making. I can vouch for that. All these children come from similar backgrounds (no one is disadvantaged), they were all attending prep classes and they all scored high on Cogat. I agree that the difference might lie in a couple of MAP percentage points, but there is no way any of them is 3 grades ahead of the class. No way.

Fast forward to this September, these children are called 'peerless outliers' and are bussed to this wonderful program where they are taught this wonderful enriched curriculum so that their 'needs' are met. But what about my child whose 'needs' are not being met because we didn't sign her up for A plus and her MAPs in math were comparatively lower?

What I would really like to see is transparency in selection process. And if it is a lottery amongst children who ,say, scored 98 and higher on the test and are in 95% percentile MAP-wise, why doesn't the county just say so?

Pretty sure kids are not getting in who score lower than 99% in most categories, at least from the high-achieving home schools. An outlier in a lower-achieving home school might look different, but there's no lottery per se. My older DD was scoring 99% 3 grades ahead in math, and 99% 4 grades ahead in reading on MAP tests and was placed in her own reading group in 3rd grade because she had no peers at her level. Isn't that the kind of kid the CES is designed for? She has a sister who scores 98/99% at grade level. She is a bright kid, but has a number of peers, and will be fine at her excellent home school. I have no expectation that she will attend a magnet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/13/us/education-gifted-students.html?action=click&module=In%20Other%20News&pgtype=Homepage&action=click&module=News&pgtype=Homepage

The only fact in the article is: The MCPS G&T program is too small in seats.

The rest is about MCPS' social engineering priorities.

Too bad the Times doesn't run the proficiency set scores of MCPS and peel back the onion a bit.

Love how the two-parent, educated w white collar job Hispanic/Black family is the example of Jack Smith's low income, low SES targeted admit example. Yeah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

I think the reduction in Asian students is solely due to the fact that there is a large Asian community clustered in one particular ES/MS. They got caught by the new home school peer group policy.

When we attended the TP orientation 3 years ago, the magnet coordinator mentioned that 2 buses were required to pick up all the kids who get on at Cold Spring elementary (granted this would include both MS and HS magnet kid).

Self segregation by these Asian families is what impacted their kids odds at the MS magnet program.

What's wrong with living near their Korean or Chinese church community?
Same way all the Central Americans live in group houses in Silver Spring and Wheaton by CASA and their Hispanic communities.

Why can't the county challenge ALL OF ITS top and middle performers well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

well, your apartment or home address is an obvious proxy for SES or income. I'd bet the correlation to education level is high 90s% to high SES as well.

[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.

Yes, it is only part of the curriculum. My child's teachers did note that the magnet classes are the exact same math and social studies classes at the magnets.

Highly doubt it is exactly the same. -- mom of 2 kids who went through TPMS magnet

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We'll see how much better the magnet programs get in a few years.

I think they will get better. They'll be picking the best kids from a much larger pool, rather than the ones with the most motivated parents.

How do we know they're picking the best students? They are only looking at test scores and location. This does not seem an effective recipe. But, there are many students that can work at this level if chosen for the program. We need a variety of admissions criteria and more seats.

Well, MCPS has decided they can't add enough seats to meet demand. Take it up with your Councilperson. Standards are higher because now they're screening everyone instead of a select few.

Standards aren't higher. Using location/peer group is different, not higher.