Anonymous
02/07/2019 07:59
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
Anonymous wrote:This sounds like a pretty serious testing irregularity. It seems like all students should have been allowed to re-test.
It had been going on for years, instead of retesting, they lowered the bar for admission the year it was discovered. Seems like a reasonable compromise. At some point the score is low enough that it's clear the time irregularity wasn't a factor. Anyway, this didn't impact the essay portion, which I'd think would be an equally important test for CAP.
Anonymous
02/07/2019 07:31
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
This sounds like a pretty serious testing irregularity. It seems like all students should have been allowed to re-test.
Anonymous
02/06/2019 22:07
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
I think the test is also different this year. Did CAP use the Cogat like the other programs? It used to be a test designed for MCPS, but I think they didn't pay to renew it this year and picked up Cogat for cheap. Very different kind of test!
Anonymous
02/06/2019 14:29
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At the beginning of the school year the CAP coordinator said that the school had asked to expand the program and that MCPS finally gave them permission
^^ Fake News ^^
Well this is the story that was announced at one of the back to school night presentations
Anonymous
02/06/2019 12:54
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:To your question about this year - no extra time for verbal. Had same amount of time for each section, even if you only were applying to CAP.
So you're saying they structured it so that a kid is only able to spend a set time on the verbal section? When they start the math section, they can't go back to the verbal section, and vice versa depending on what was administered first? That was the problem with prior years' administration -- it was all put together, so, if you decided to give up on the math section, you could spend more time on the verbal section.
That is my understanding.
Anonymous
02/06/2019 12:42
Subject: Re:Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
Anonymous wrote:Has anyone received rejections from CAP? I know of kids that have gotten in but not rejected or waitlisted. We have received no letter at all. My child isn't optimistic but I find it odd.
My kid’s friend has gotten a rejection from CAP.
Anonymous
02/06/2019 12:20
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
Anonymous wrote:To your question about this year - no extra time for verbal. Had same amount of time for each section, even if you only were applying to CAP.
So you're saying they structured it so that a kid is only able to spend a set time on the verbal section? When they start the math section, they can't go back to the verbal section, and vice versa depending on what was administered first? That was the problem with prior years' administration -- it was all put together, so, if you decided to give up on the math section, you could spend more time on the verbal section.
Anonymous
02/06/2019 10:46
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
Anonymous wrote:At the beginning of the school year the CAP coordinator said that the school had asked to expand the program and that MCPS finally gave them permission
^^ Fake News ^^
Anonymous
02/06/2019 10:31
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
To your question about this year - no extra time for verbal. Had same amount of time for each section, even if you only were applying to CAP.
Anonymous
02/06/2019 10:27
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
Anonymous wrote:Why do they need more teachers? They've managed for this year.
They managed for a year with 25, one classroom. If it's continued going forward it will actually be an expansion by 100 students, 4 classrooms. That's two full time positions over the course of the program, it can't just be absorbed.
Anonymous
02/06/2019 09:43
Subject: Re:Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
Has anyone received rejections from CAP? I know of kids that have gotten in but not rejected or waitlisted. We have received no letter at all. My child isn't optimistic but I find it odd.
Anonymous
02/06/2019 09:34
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
Why do they need more teachers? They've managed for this year.
Anonymous
02/06/2019 08:03
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
Anonymous wrote:So, last year, the CAP class went from 75 to about 100 when they let all the kids in off the waitpool because of a testing problem. That meant 4 sections of CAP classes instead of the traditional 3. Anyone know if they went back down or are keeping the bigger size class
Also, does anyone know definitively what the testing problem was last year? I'll tell you what my kid told me the rumor was -- that kids who only intended to go to CAP and so only had to take the verbal part of the test, signed up for a program where they had to take both verbal and quantitative (e.g. RMIB), but then spent all their time on the verbal portion of the test, in effect getting double the time to do the verbal as compared to kids who were trying to do both sections. My kid who took the test a few years ago told me how the test was structured, and I thought it was crazy because it allowed for just that kind of gamesmanship, so that struck me as a reasonable story about what happened last year. Was the testing this year structured so that you only had a certainly amount of time for each type of test and couldn't work on other parts of the test during that time?
I heard the same, only without the bit about students deliberately signing up for the math test to exploit the loophole. What I heard was simply that statistically last year's CAP applicants who took both tests had much better scores on the reading test compared to those who only took the reading. So much so that it was clear there were people in the waitlist who were only there because they'd taken the test under a different time constraint. Also it was the testing office that flagged the problem and came up with the remedy, not CAP admin.
If they continue with the larger size, they need more teachers. Didn't anyone who applied this year hear how many seats would be available?
Anonymous
02/05/2019 20:21
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
At the beginning of the school year the CAP coordinator said that the school had asked to expand the program and that MCPS finally gave them permission
Anonymous
02/05/2019 17:44
Subject: Did the CAP class go back down to 75 this year and was the test structured differently?
So, last year, the CAP class went from 75 to about 100 when they let all the kids in off the waitpool because of a testing problem. That meant 4 sections of CAP classes instead of the traditional 3. Anyone know if they went back down or are keeping the bigger size class
Also, does anyone know definitively what the testing problem was last year? I'll tell you what my kid told me the rumor was -- that kids who only intended to go to CAP and so only had to take the verbal part of the test, signed up for a program where they had to take both verbal and quantitative (e.g. RMIB), but then spent all their time on the verbal portion of the test, in effect getting double the time to do the verbal as compared to kids who were trying to do both sections. My kid who took the test a few years ago told me how the test was structured, and I thought it was crazy because it allowed for just that kind of gamesmanship, so that struck me as a reasonable story about what happened last year. Was the testing this year structured so that you only had a certainly amount of time for each type of test and couldn't work on other parts of the test during that time?
Also, does anyone know definitively what the testing problem was last year? I'll tell you what my kid told me the rumor was -- that kids who only intended to go to CAP and so only had to take the verbal part of the test, signed up for a program where they had to take both verbal and quantitative (e.g. RMIB), but then spent all their time on the verbal portion of the test, in effect getting double the time to do the verbal as compared to kids who were trying to do both sections. My kid who took the test a few years ago told me how the test was structured, and I thought it was crazy because it allowed for just that kind of gamesmanship, so that struck me as a reasonable story about what happened last year. Was the testing this year structured so that you only had a certainly amount of time for each type of test and couldn't work on other parts of the test during that time?