Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I find it ironic that the people pushing for more classroom segregation are often the ones talking about mixing the buildings the most. As if the ideas of mixing class rooms are toxic but mixing the buildings provides magic benefits. Or as if putting high achievers off to the side as to not be affected by the plebeians is noble in academics but immoral for SES academics.
Your desire to keep your child untethered is no different than the W’s desire, and poor kids and the education gap could be helped by just mixing kids by age and letting the rest fall where it may. But on the same token we have to be honest that the collective is help back by the weight of the needy and inept.
Truth
This is borderline incomprehensible.
Anonymous wrote:Read this https://montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2019/Enriched%20and%20Accelerated%2028Jan2019%20FINAL.pdf
Then continue your argument.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If MoCo is only admitting 99%-tile kids, then it is unlikely that that population has exploded to the same extent. I agree the program should be expanded. It should also be made made continuous ie once you are in you should only leave if you fail out and there should be entry years where you can test on along the way. For the über gifted there can be special programs but smart hardworking kids shouldn’t have to compete for advanced work
We’ll never know, they stopped reporting cogat scores of admits last year when they remade the selection criteria. Who knows what the bar is now—90%, 95%, 99%??
Either way for a “top school district” with a large portion of the most educated parents in the country, mcps only having G&T seats for less than 1% of its student body is pretty pathetic. And telling of the Admins priorities and share of mind (ie. It ain’t on high performers).
For CES programs, it's more than 1%. Probably north of 5%. There are 9 regional CES programs, and if each has only 2 CES classes per grade (ours has 3) with 28 kids each, that's 504 seats. Assuming the 162K students in the system are evenly distributed across K-12, that's about 12,500 per grade. The regional CES programs cover 4% of kids in each grade, more if you count the local centers.
It’s still pretty exclusive ( I mean that as excluding qualified candidates not some highly vaunted thing). Given the demographics of the county, this means a lot of kids who would benefit are being short changed.
I don't disagree, but I posted that because these debates tend to be fact-free zones, and that isn't helping.
If you want to provide facts or something comprehensive, put up a density map with stars of where the CES are located, number of ES schools each pulls from, number of total 3rd graders each CES has purview over.
Do the same for Ms and Hs magnets.
Actually, please do it yourself, rather than just bellyaching. The information is there; you are just being lazy. I'm not here to indulge in your fantasy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I find it ironic that the people pushing for more classroom segregation are often the ones talking about mixing the buildings the most. As if the ideas of mixing class rooms are toxic but mixing the buildings provides magic benefits. Or as if putting high achievers off to the side as to not be affected by the plebeians is noble in academics but immoral for SES academics.
Your desire to keep your child untethered is no different than the W’s desire, and poor kids and the education gap could be helped by just mixing kids by age and letting the rest fall where it may. But on the same token we have to be honest that the collective is help back by the weight of the needy and inept.
Truth
This is borderline incomprehensible.
Agree.
I don't
It draws the parallels between some parents who believe that clustering kids in classrooms often by SES and calling them gifted isn't that different from parents attempting to cluster kids in schools often by SES and calling them privileged. It is all about concentrating resources and targeting them towards those who need them the least at the expense of kids with less.
-You don't think kids at the bottom of the education gap wouldn't benefit from having more CES kids in their class?
-How is that different than poor kids benefiting from having rich kids integrated into their poor school? Some might say it is the exact same conversation.
I see the point
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If MoCo is only admitting 99%-tile kids, then it is unlikely that that population has exploded to the same extent. I agree the program should be expanded. It should also be made made continuous ie once you are in you should only leave if you fail out and there should be entry years where you can test on along the way. For the über gifted there can be special programs but smart hardworking kids shouldn’t have to compete for advanced work
We’ll never know, they stopped reporting cogat scores of admits last year when they remade the selection criteria. Who knows what the bar is now—90%, 95%, 99%??
Either way for a “top school district” with a large portion of the most educated parents in the country, mcps only having G&T seats for less than 1% of its student body is pretty pathetic. And telling of the Admins priorities and share of mind (ie. It ain’t on high performers).
For CES programs, it's more than 1%. Probably north of 5%. There are 9 regional CES programs, and if each has only 2 CES classes per grade (ours has 3) with 28 kids each, that's 504 seats. Assuming the 162K students in the system are evenly distributed across K-12, that's about 12,500 per grade. The regional CES programs cover 4% of kids in each grade, more if you count the local centers.
It’s still pretty exclusive ( I mean that as excluding qualified candidates not some highly vaunted thing). Given the demographics of the county, this means a lot of kids who would benefit are being short changed.
I don't disagree, but I posted that because these debates tend to be fact-free zones, and that isn't helping.
If you want to provide facts or something comprehensive, put up a density map with stars of where the CES are located, number of ES schools each pulls from, number of total 3rd graders each CES has purview over.
Do the same for Ms and Hs magnets.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If MoCo is only admitting 99%-tile kids, then it is unlikely that that population has exploded to the same extent. I agree the program should be expanded. It should also be made made continuous ie once you are in you should only leave if you fail out and there should be entry years where you can test on along the way. For the über gifted there can be special programs but smart hardworking kids shouldn’t have to compete for advanced work
We’ll never know, they stopped reporting cogat scores of admits last year when they remade the selection criteria. Who knows what the bar is now—90%, 95%, 99%??
Either way for a “top school district” with a large portion of the most educated parents in the country, mcps only having G&T seats for less than 1% of its student body is pretty pathetic. And telling of the Admins priorities and share of mind (ie. It ain’t on high performers).
For CES programs, it's more than 1%. Probably north of 5%. There are 9 regional CES programs, and if each has only 2 CES classes per grade (ours has 3) with 28 kids each, that's 504 seats. Assuming the 162K students in the system are evenly distributed across K-12, that's about 12,500 per grade. The regional CES programs cover 4% of kids in each grade, more if you count the local centers.
It’s still pretty exclusive ( I mean that as excluding qualified candidates not some highly vaunted thing). Given the demographics of the county, this means a lot of kids who would benefit are being short changed.
I don't disagree, but I posted that because these debates tend to be fact-free zones, and that isn't helping.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I find it ironic that the people pushing for more classroom segregation are often the ones talking about mixing the buildings the most. As if the ideas of mixing class rooms are toxic but mixing the buildings provides magic benefits. Or as if putting high achievers off to the side as to not be affected by the plebeians is noble in academics but immoral for SES academics.
Your desire to keep your child untethered is no different than the W’s desire, and poor kids and the education gap could be helped by just mixing kids by age and letting the rest fall where it may. But on the same token we have to be honest that the collective is help back by the weight of the needy and inept.
Truth
This is borderline incomprehensible.
Agree.
I don't
It draws the parallels between some parents who believe that clustering kids in classrooms often by SES and calling them gifted isn't that different from parents attempting to cluster kids in schools often by SES and calling them privileged. It is all about concentrating resources and targeting them towards those who need them the least at the expense of kids with less.
-You don't think kids at the bottom of the education gap wouldn't benefit from having more CES kids in their class?
-How is that different than poor kids benefiting from having rich kids integrated into their poor school? Some might say it is the exact same conversation.
I see the point
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If MoCo is only admitting 99%-tile kids, then it is unlikely that that population has exploded to the same extent. I agree the program should be expanded. It should also be made made continuous ie once you are in you should only leave if you fail out and there should be entry years where you can test on along the way. For the über gifted there can be special programs but smart hardworking kids shouldn’t have to compete for advanced work
We’ll never know, they stopped reporting cogat scores of admits last year when they remade the selection criteria. Who knows what the bar is now—90%, 95%, 99%??
Either way for a “top school district” with a large portion of the most educated parents in the country, mcps only having G&T seats for less than 1% of its student body is pretty pathetic. And telling of the Admins priorities and share of mind (ie. It ain’t on high performers).
For CES programs, it's more than 1%. Probably north of 5%. There are 9 regional CES programs, and if each has only 2 CES classes per grade (ours has 3) with 28 kids each, that's 504 seats. Assuming the 162K students in the system are evenly distributed across K-12, that's about 12,500 per grade. The regional CES programs cover 4% of kids in each grade, more if you count the local centers.
It’s still pretty exclusive ( I mean that as excluding qualified candidates not some highly vaunted thing). Given the demographics of the county, this means a lot of kids who would benefit are being short changed.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I find it ironic that the people pushing for more classroom segregation are often the ones talking about mixing the buildings the most. As if the ideas of mixing class rooms are toxic but mixing the buildings provides magic benefits. Or as if putting high achievers off to the side as to not be affected by the plebeians is noble in academics but immoral for SES academics.
Your desire to keep your child untethered is no different than the W’s desire, and poor kids and the education gap could be helped by just mixing kids by age and letting the rest fall where it may. But on the same token we have to be honest that the collective is help back by the weight of the needy and inept.
Truth
This is borderline incomprehensible.
Agree.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If MoCo is only admitting 99%-tile kids, then it is unlikely that that population has exploded to the same extent. I agree the program should be expanded. It should also be made made continuous ie once you are in you should only leave if you fail out and there should be entry years where you can test on along the way. For the über gifted there can be special programs but smart hardworking kids shouldn’t have to compete for advanced work
We’ll never know, they stopped reporting cogat scores of admits last year when they remade the selection criteria. Who knows what the bar is now—90%, 95%, 99%??
Either way for a “top school district” with a large portion of the most educated parents in the country, mcps only having G&T seats for less than 1% of its student body is pretty pathetic. And telling of the Admins priorities and share of mind (ie. It ain’t on high performers).
For CES programs, it's more than 1%. Probably north of 5%. There are 9 regional CES programs, and if each has only 2 CES classes per grade (ours has 3) with 28 kids each, that's 504 seats. Assuming the 162K students in the system are evenly distributed across K-12, that's about 12,500 per grade. The regional CES programs cover 4% of kids in each grade, more if you count the local centers.
It’s still pretty exclusive ( I mean that as excluding qualified candidates not some highly vaunted thing). Given the demographics of the county, this means a lot of kids who would benefit are being short changed.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I find it ironic that the people pushing for more classroom segregation are often the ones talking about mixing the buildings the most. As if the ideas of mixing class rooms are toxic but mixing the buildings provides magic benefits. Or as if putting high achievers off to the side as to not be affected by the plebeians is noble in academics but immoral for SES academics.
Your desire to keep your child untethered is no different than the W’s desire, and poor kids and the education gap could be helped by just mixing kids by age and letting the rest fall where it may. But on the same token we have to be honest that the collective is help back by the weight of the needy and inept.
Have you ever tried to learn another language through immersion? It's incredibly hard and it's not fair to claim that all English language learning students are needy and inept.