Reply to MAP Tests and Magnet Selection

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "MAP Tests and Magnet Selection "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Some years, my DC starts off with a really high score in the fall, which then dips in the winter and slightly rebounds in the spring. Other years, he begins with a score about 10 points lower in the fall, shows no change in the winter, and then improves significantly in the spring. His friends’ scores also fluctuate unpredictably. This kind of inconsistency shows why this test should never have been used for magnet school lotteries.[/quote]

Not really. It shows that your kid isn’t a good candidate for the magnets. The magnet programs are tough and consistency is important. There’s room for some fluctuation but not if it means going below 99th.[/quote]

DP.

Even if it were true that magnets only should take 99th, MAP is the wrong test.  Given its purpose and construction, it would be at best a supporting data point in the identification, better via other means, of those most capable, which is the population for whom magnets principally should be available.

And the post seems unnecessarily mean-spirited.  Who is to say that the variation PP noted for their DC wasn't all within the 99th?  (Again, not that 99th MAP is a proper magnet litmus.)[/quote]

It wasn’t. She wouldn’t have been complaining here if it was.[/quote]

I wasn’t complaining. Just trying to point how unreliable the scores are for magnet placement, given such variations. In fact,  my kid was selected for the magnet program.

But many of the selected students were not in the 99th percentile, they were 95th or 94th and now they are in the 89th or 87th.  It’s concerning that the score cutoffs vary by cluster—it makes no sense for a student in the 99th percentile to be grouped with others scoring in the 75th to 85th percentile.

Additionally, several students who barely met the cutoff in the fall have since seen their scores decline. This raises the question: if the selection had been based on winter or spring scores instead of fall, the resulting group of students would likely be very different.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics