Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
IEP 504 FARMS and ESOL are all positive factors for consideration when applying to these special programs

Please provide a source for this. I really think you are incorrect.

If you have the IEP 504 FARMS and ESOL factor, you are not "Locally Normed". With 85%, you are in the lottery.
If you don't have the above factor, depends, but in a low moderate FARM school, 96% will NOT be in the lottery.
They will adjust points to make it locally normed, and you are not in the lottery anymore. 96 - 12 = 84% percentile

I was on the MCPS website a while ago, where they listed admission factors to the application special programs. You'll have to find it yourself since I didn't save the link. It's also been discussed on this board numerous times. Again you'll need to search yourself to find those threads but it really isn't that hard.

PP is correct. Look under FAQs
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jmQmo4UZDowNzddfXA56UtyB0KJPSfwiGi9oqqVT1OI/mobilebasic

I am very familiar with the FAQs. Nowhere in it does it say you are not “locally normed” if you have a 504 or receive FARMS, etc. You assumed/inferred that. I understand how local norming works. I promise you the MCCPTA gifted Ed committee has tried very very hard to get AEI to clarify how these student services are incorporated into the process and has asked if there is a separate lottery for those students or if they have different thresholds. AEI has not answered this question.

I don’t think you are reading the criteria very thoroughly. It says SpEd, ELD, 504, etc, are some of the measures that are used to evaluate students for the program. While it doesn’t say these students will not be locally normed, these are factors that are taken into account.

I assure you I’m reading it thoroughly. As I said, I am aware those are some of the criteria they are using in the process. I just take issue with the assumption a PP is making that being a student with one of those identifications confers some type of advantage or thumb on the scale in the process. It does not. Or perhaps it does. But it is not explained. If you look down to number 10 on the FAQ, it essentially says even if your kid is identified and wins the lottery, if you are a member if one of these special populations, your team can recommend that you not go forward with the CES placement. I truly think they norm everybody’s scores and then for students who have IEPs or ESOL or whatever else, they take a second look at their data and supports/accommodations needed to see if they can provide it within the CES program. If they can, kid gets the offer. If not, kid does not. Vast majority of kids with IEPs, ESOL, etc are not in the top 15 percent to begin with. Of course some are, but it’s not thousands of kids.

Their site makes it clear it does but the earlier poster here seemed to think it counted against a kid which is not only false but illegal.

+1 So the question is whether SpEd, ELD, etc, counts for or against the student. If being SpEd, for example, counts against the student, that is illegal. So the fact that SpEd, ELD, etc, are factors, and they are not negative factors -- the only remaining choice is that they are positive factors. If they were "neutral" factors, then they would not be factors at all and why would they even mention these in FAQs.

I explained one plausible way they could be used as factors. I think one poster is imagining them sort of like “hooks” for college admissions. Like you get an extra point in a point system for legacy or athlete or first gen or whatnot. This lottery isn’t that complex. They use data to get a list of those who have the A grades in the particular marking period and the MAP scores in a particular semester. They put those student IDs into a lottery pool and use a random number generator to select the winners, to whom they offer seats. If you think being part of these special populations is a “positive factor” how exactly do you think it’s happening in the process? Literally describe how that would work with the lottery pool.

Anonymous wrote:Pine Crest--kid was in the lottery but not selected, will get ELC next year. Honestly we (including kid) had been going back and forth about wanting a spot. Kid wanted more in-depth, interesting work but was not excited about the longer bus ride and super late dismissal, which would've messed with their long-held after school activity. Staying at the same school with pull-outs for ELC and compacted math seems to be the best option, to be honest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
IEP 504 FARMS and ESOL are all positive factors for consideration when applying to these special programs

Please provide a source for this. I really think you are incorrect.

If you have the IEP 504 FARMS and ESOL factor, you are not "Locally Normed". With 85%, you are in the lottery.
If you don't have the above factor, depends, but in a low moderate FARM school, 96% will NOT be in the lottery.
They will adjust points to make it locally normed, and you are not in the lottery anymore. 96 - 12 = 84% percentile

I was on the MCPS website a while ago, where they listed admission factors to the application special programs. You'll have to find it yourself since I didn't save the link. It's also been discussed on this board numerous times. Again you'll need to search yourself to find those threads but it really isn't that hard.

PP is correct. Look under FAQs
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jmQmo4UZDowNzddfXA56UtyB0KJPSfwiGi9oqqVT1OI/mobilebasic

I am very familiar with the FAQs. Nowhere in it does it say you are not “locally normed” if you have a 504 or receive FARMS, etc. You assumed/inferred that. I understand how local norming works. I promise you the MCCPTA gifted Ed committee has tried very very hard to get AEI to clarify how these student services are incorporated into the process and has asked if there is a separate lottery for those students or if they have different thresholds. AEI has not answered this question.

I don’t think you are reading the criteria very thoroughly. It says SpEd, ELD, 504, etc, are some of the measures that are used to evaluate students for the program. While it doesn’t say these students will not be locally normed, these are factors that are taken into account.

I assure you I’m reading it thoroughly. As I said, I am aware those are some of the criteria they are using in the process. I just take issue with the assumption a PP is making that being a student with one of those identifications confers some type of advantage or thumb on the scale in the process. It does not. Or perhaps it does. But it is not explained. If you look down to number 10 on the FAQ, it essentially says even if your kid is identified and wins the lottery, if you are a member if one of these special populations, your team can recommend that you not go forward with the CES placement. I truly think they norm everybody’s scores and then for students who have IEPs or ESOL or whatever else, they take a second look at their data and supports/accommodations needed to see if they can provide it within the CES program. If they can, kid gets the offer. If not, kid does not. Vast majority of kids with IEPs, ESOL, etc are not in the top 15 percent to begin with. Of course some are, but it’s not thousands of kids.

Their site makes it clear it does but the earlier poster here seemed to think it counted against a kid which is not only false but illegal.

+1 So the question is whether SpEd, ELD, etc, counts for or against the student. If being SpEd, for example, counts against the student, that is illegal. So the fact that SpEd, ELD, etc, are factors, and they are not negative factors -- the only remaining choice is that they are positive factors. If they were "neutral" factors, then they would not be factors at all and why would they even mention these in FAQs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS should stop wasting money on surveys and contractors and start focusing on properly educating all the kids who meet the parameters for CES/enrichment/magnet schools. Or perhaps MCPS needs to also ask why so many kids qualify for these enhancement programs? Maybe educational standards need to go up. These lotteries are ridiculous.

Agreed.

+1 Maybe raise the bar to top 2 percent, the way CTY does, to enter the lottery, and moderate or high FARMs can be locally normed.

Maybe we could actually dedicate money and resources to expanding the enriched studies program so that every kid who qualifies can access that instruction.

I have older kids and there have always been more students qualified than they have space for. If kids qualify, they should be able to be in these programs. If you think you are frustrated now, just wait until middle school when they offer even fewer spots in special programs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for parents who have kids who didn’t make the lottery but are bright and above grade level in reading. Scores above 89th percentile. Are you worried about not getting elc next year?

The school should be pulling qualified kids in even if they aren't in the lottery. Some schools are going to an ELC-for-all model, so all kids will get it.

So they're raising all students to this higher standard?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS should stop wasting money on surveys and contractors and start focusing on properly educating all the kids who meet the parameters for CES/enrichment/magnet schools. Or perhaps MCPS needs to also ask why so many kids qualify for these enhancement programs? Maybe educational standards need to go up. These lotteries are ridiculous.

Agreed.

+1 Maybe raise the bar to top 2 percent, the way CTY does, to enter the lottery, and moderate or high FARMs can be locally normed.

Maybe we could actually dedicate money and resources to expanding the enriched studies program so that every kid who qualifies can access that instruction.

Anonymous wrote:So you think kids who didn’t get in the lottery have a chance to get elc? My kid had a higher score in the fall but his score fell on the winter map. He would have been placed in the lottery based on the fall score. It seems like bad luck, if his scores were reversed he would qualify!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS should stop wasting money on surveys and contractors and start focusing on properly educating all the kids who meet the parameters for CES/enrichment/magnet schools. Or perhaps MCPS needs to also ask why so many kids qualify for these enhancement programs? Maybe educational standards need to go up. These lotteries are ridiculous.

Agreed.

+1 Maybe raise the bar to top 2 percent, the way CTY does, to enter the lottery, and moderate or high FARMs can be locally normed.

Maybe we could actually dedicate money and resources to expanding the enriched studies program so that every kid who qualifies can access that instruction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for parents who have kids who didn’t make the lottery but are bright and above grade level in reading. Scores above 89th percentile. Are you worried about not getting elc next year?

The school should be pulling qualified kids in even if they aren't in the lottery. Some schools are going to an ELC-for-all model, so all kids will get it.

Anonymous wrote:I'm an ES teacher on leave right now, and I may be wrong since I'm not currently involved in the discussions on this topic at my school, but it's my understanding that the ELC is far less "capped" at numbers than the CES. If a school has 40 kids who meet the criteria for the ELC, whatever those may be, than they will have it. My school is getting it next year for 4th graders, and the talk has been that we will have one non-classroom teacher who will pull those students out and have them for the entire ELA block. If there are too many students for one class, the classroom teachers will shift students for ELA and one of them will also teach the ELC.

So if your child should get ELC, I believe they will. And it sounds like if they don't "qualify" there is still wiggle room for parents (and teachers) to advocate that they be allowed to try. But again, I don't have proof! My own kid did not get selected for CES but will get ELC and I think that's going to work best for our family. If he was offered a spot from the waitlist, I'm pretty sure we would decline.

Anonymous wrote:Question for parents who have kids who didn’t make the lottery but are bright and above grade level in reading. Scores above 89th percentile. Are you worried about not getting elc next year?