Anonymous
04/09/2016 17:26
Subject: Re:Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Work to address barriers to equitable access in the elementary center program by revising Board Policy IOA to broaden the definition of giftedness to focus on identifying students who are highly able from all backgrounds
Bolded is the contentious statement. What does this mean? Most are taking it to mean that they will lower the test score criteria. If that happens, but the test score is still weighed heavily, then it may end up that more Whites/Asians get in rather than the URM.
Even if you just take the top performing 3 to 4% of each ES across the board, you *may* find that the top performing kids in a heavily URM school are the few WhiteAsian kids at the school. Then what? Would they want to change the admissions criteria again?
How do you "broaden" the criteria for "giftedness" if not by lowering the test scores?
Anonymous
04/09/2016 17:16
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Anonymous wrote:I have kids in a very racially and socioeconomically diverse MCPS elementary school, so this is an issue I've spent some time thinking about and I wish there were easy answers.
As my oldest moves through the system, I see Black & Latino kids who were her academic peers in kindergarten fall further behind, at least as defined by something as simple as who is in the most advanced reading and math groups.
What's happening? These are kids with 2-parent homes with parents who have stable if working class employment, and families involved in their kids' education.
So, what is it? My guess is a combination of subtle racial bias on the part of certain teachers, the summer learning gap, and the cumulative effects of all the enrichment the middle class kids are getting.
I'd like the PP who keeps saying "just follow the suggestions" to come here and tell us, in plain English, what those suggestions are. There's a gap. I can see it. So how do you bridge that gap in the testing process when the cause of the gap is so totally unrelated?
"The general figure for the heritability of IQ, according to an authoritative American Psychological Association report, is 0.45 for children, and rises to around 0.75 for late teens and adults. The heritability of IQ increases with age and reaches an asymptote at 18–20 years of age and continues at that level well into adulthood. Recent studies suggest that family and parenting characteristics are not significant contributors to variation in IQ scores."
So basically, as the kids get older heritability comes into effect more. This is a very common pattern. If you tested the parents it would probably shed a lot of light on why the kids aren't progressing as much.
Anonymous
04/09/2016 17:16
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Anonymous wrote:There is not much cost to having an HGC. Doesn't require a magnet coordinator. The curriculum is already developed. Kids would be in MCPS regardless (or at least the vast majority). Only issue is transportation.
The report says that the additional incremental cost of the HGCs is about $1.3 million, which is not much in the context of the whole MCPS operating budget.
Anonymous
04/09/2016 17:15
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Anonymous wrote:
I'd like the PP who keeps saying "just follow the suggestions" to come here and tell us, in plain English, what those suggestions are. There's a gap. I can see it. So how do you bridge that gap in the testing process when the cause of the gap is so totally unrelated?
Here are the recommendations for the HGC. You can read them. I can read them. We can all read them.
-Work to address barriers to equitable access in the elementary center program by revising Board Policy IOA to broaden the definition of giftedness to focus on identifying students who are highly able from all backgrounds and implementing modifications to the identification process that have been developed in other districts and at the secondary and postsecondary levels, as discussed in the section on middle and high school magnets below.
-Develop and expand talent development programs and outreach efforts designed to identify, target, and recruit highly able students from underrepresented groups, including Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino students, non-native English speakers, and low-income students, to apply to the highly gifted centers.
-Develop new and enhance existing practices for all elementary centers to ensure that students in the center program and other students in hosting schools have meaningful social and academic interactions, such as expanded use of specials, common lunch or recess periods, and extracurricular programs.
-To the extent that MCPS considers expanding seat capacity for elementary centers for highly gifted students to keep pace with the overall growth in the district’s population that has occurred since the last seat expansion in 2006, the district should ensure that any expansion is fully aligned with efforts to ensure equitable access to the highly gifted programs.
Anonymous
04/09/2016 17:10
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Anonymous wrote:If mcps admits more kids from "other" groups, will these kids immediately become more able students? If they entering the HGC with low test score, are they ready to face the challenge? If mcps and the whole US cannot close the GAP, why does anyone think just putting these kids into a HGC class will make them better students.
Nobody is saying that.
Anonymous
04/09/2016 17:09
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Anonymous wrote:
If you have a 100 seats, take the top 100 scorer. As simple as that.
That is very simple, but it doesn't necessarily make sense. You are saying that admission to the HGC should be based on one single criterion, namely: the test score on a standardized test. Why is that a good way to decide on admissions to the HGC? It's the Highly Gifted Center, not the Center For Kids Who Do Really Well On Standardized Tests.
Anonymous
04/09/2016 17:04
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
If mcps admits more kids from "other" groups, will these kids immediately become more able students? If they entering the HGC with low test score, are they ready to face the challenge? If mcps and the whole US cannot close the GAP, why does anyone think just putting these kids into a HGC class will make them better students.
Anonymous
04/09/2016 16:05
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
There is not much cost to having an HGC. Doesn't require a magnet coordinator. The curriculum is already developed. Kids would be in MCPS regardless (or at least the vast majority). Only issue is transportation.
Anonymous
04/09/2016 15:53
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NYT article today, "Why Talented Black and Hispanic Students Can Go Undiscovered"
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/upshot/why-talented-black-and-hispanic-students-can-go-undiscovered.html?_r=1
Nonverbal test as first step.
We already due this screening and many minority kids are identified however because of the limited slots many don't make it to the HGC. So we are back to the same solution almost everyone will agree with.... Make more slots!
OK
Pay up then.
Do you think MCPS magically pulls slots out of its ass?
MCPS has money to pay Metis for this stupid ass research as well as pay Joshua Starr? Sure, it has money to magically pull out from its ass. Maybe start by removing bullshit positions in MCPS central office. Like the department of Equity - because it is basically department of "Hide Achievement Gap by using smoke and mirrors" .
If MCPS simply adds more slots without changing how/the demographics of who they select, they will simply add even more Asians. This will not increase the Hispanic and black numbers at all.
Anonymous
04/09/2016 14:56
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NYT article today, "Why Talented Black and Hispanic Students Can Go Undiscovered"
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/upshot/why-talented-black-and-hispanic-students-can-go-undiscovered.html?_r=1
Nonverbal test as first step.
We already due this screening and many minority kids are identified however because of the limited slots many don't make it to the HGC. So we are back to the same solution almost everyone will agree with.... Make more slots!
OK
Pay up then.
Do you think MCPS magically pulls slots out of its ass?
MCPS has money to pay Metis for this stupid ass research as well as pay Joshua Starr? Sure, it has money to magically pull out from its ass. Maybe start by removing bullshit positions in MCPS central office. Like the department of Equity - because it is basically department of "Hide Achievement Gap by using smoke and mirrors" .
Anonymous
04/09/2016 14:25
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NYT article today, "Why Talented Black and Hispanic Students Can Go Undiscovered"
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/upshot/why-talented-black-and-hispanic-students-can-go-undiscovered.html?_r=1
Nonverbal test as first step.
We already due this screening and many minority kids are identified however because of the limited slots many don't make it to the HGC. So we are back to the same solution almost everyone will agree with.... Make more slots!
OK
Pay up then.
Do you think MCPS magically pulls slots out of its ass?
Anonymous
04/09/2016 10:25
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Metis was given the political wink by MCPS and told MCPS to lower standards for URM. This would increase URM participation in magnets, but would that bridge the achievement gap? Would that increase achievement in Blacks and Hispanics? I don't think so. It will keep some people with political and racial agenda happy, but it will not benefit all students.
If MCPS thinks that the Magnets should reflect the racial composition of the county, then in fact every school should reflect the racial composition of the county. When my child has to go to a home school with 80% blacks and Hispanics, and 80% FARMS and ESOL kids - he is not getting the diversity of MoCo. He is getting the slums of MoCo. I want my kid to go to the "W" schools. I do not think my child should lack the opportunities just because I did not buy a house in a "rich" locality. I want equity. I want my kid bused to Bethesda schools.
I wonder did they poll Black and Hispanic students to see if they wanted to go to Magnet schools? I bet the answer would be a resounding "no" from a vast majority.
Where did Metis do this? They didn't do it in the public report. Did they do it secretly? What is the source of your information?
You are either extremely dense or deliberately trying to annoy people. It has been explained to you in multiple places. Go back and reread those replies.
The replies all boil down to, "Well, they didn't actually say it in so many words, but we all know what they're really saying."
No, it boils down to what they said. URMs are not in magnet programs because the CRITERIA for admissions (which is primarily academic) does not favor them. So, there should be different criteria for different groups. What different groups? They are not saying to lower the standards for those Asians who are not getting into the program because of lack of space in HGC. No, Instead they want to lower the standards for URMs, because they are not applying and they are not scoring high enough to get in when they do apply.
If you have a 100 seats, take the top 100 scorer. As simple as that.
Shame on MCPS.
Anonymous
04/09/2016 10:20
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
I have kids in a very racially and socioeconomically diverse MCPS elementary school, so this is an issue I've spent some time thinking about and I wish there were easy answers.
As my oldest moves through the system, I see Black & Latino kids who were her academic peers in kindergarten fall further behind, at least as defined by something as simple as who is in the most advanced reading and math groups.
What's happening? These are kids with 2-parent homes with parents who have stable if working class employment, and families involved in their kids' education.
So, what is it? My guess is a combination of subtle racial bias on the part of certain teachers, the summer learning gap, and the cumulative effects of all the enrichment the middle class kids are getting.
I'd like the PP who keeps saying "just follow the suggestions" to come here and tell us, in plain English, what those suggestions are. There's a gap. I can see it. So how do you bridge that gap in the testing process when the cause of the gap is so totally unrelated?
As my oldest moves through the system, I see Black & Latino kids who were her academic peers in kindergarten fall further behind, at least as defined by something as simple as who is in the most advanced reading and math groups.
What's happening? These are kids with 2-parent homes with parents who have stable if working class employment, and families involved in their kids' education.
So, what is it? My guess is a combination of subtle racial bias on the part of certain teachers, the summer learning gap, and the cumulative effects of all the enrichment the middle class kids are getting.
I'd like the PP who keeps saying "just follow the suggestions" to come here and tell us, in plain English, what those suggestions are. There's a gap. I can see it. So how do you bridge that gap in the testing process when the cause of the gap is so totally unrelated?
Anonymous
04/09/2016 10:18
Subject: Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Metis was given the political wink by MCPS and told MCPS to lower standards for URM. This would increase URM participation in magnets, but would that bridge the achievement gap? Would that increase achievement in Blacks and Hispanics? I don't think so. It will keep some people with political and racial agenda happy, but it will not benefit all students.
If MCPS thinks that the Magnets should reflect the racial composition of the county, then in fact every school should reflect the racial composition of the county. When my child has to go to a home school with 80% blacks and Hispanics, and 80% FARMS and ESOL kids - he is not getting the diversity of MoCo. He is getting the slums of MoCo. I want my kid to go to the "W" schools. I do not think my child should lack the opportunities just because I did not buy a house in a "rich" locality. I want equity. I want my kid bused to Bethesda schools.
I wonder did they poll Black and Hispanic students to see if they wanted to go to Magnet schools? I bet the answer would be a resounding "no" from a vast majority.
Where did Metis do this? They didn't do it in the public report. Did they do it secretly? What is the source of your information?
You are either extremely dense or deliberately trying to annoy people. It has been explained to you in multiple places. Go back and reread those replies.
The replies all boil down to, "Well, they didn't actually say it in so many words, but we all know what they're really saying."
Anonymous
04/09/2016 10:09
Subject: Re:Reaction to "Study of Choice and Special Academic Programs: Report of Findings and Recommendations"
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think what MCPS needs to do, is take BABY STEPS, to better pinpoint what works without compromising the standards and rigorousness of the magnet programs.
I think MCPS should open more HGC centers in those schools that have a high URM population (Title 1). The selection criteria for these HGCs should be exactly like the current HGC admission process, however, they should make all the 3rd graders of the HGC hosting schools take the test - without filling in the applications. The test should be mandatory for all the students.
There will be some students from host school who will score high enough to get in on their own merit, but then the host school should also have some seats available for their top students based on teacher recommendation. These should be additional seats and not seats that the take away from outside students who went through the application process. THis should be a race blind process.
Then - there should also be another class room made entirely of the Host school GT students, who should be taught the same curriculum as the HGC students. Again this should be race blind. We should then see how these well these students do. What level of acceleration do they need to be successful. Maybe these students don't need the rigor of HGC, but they need more than what is being offered in the regular classroom. We would have then taken away the barriers for URMs like - the lack of knowledge about the program, the need to fill an application, the transportation issues, the difficulty of identifying the gifted URM students etc. Lets start with baby steps first.
NO one wants to keep the URMs down, they should be given resources, but they still have to use these resources to compete and to succeed on their own merit. Just like everyone else.
*fixed above.
Except this may be perceived as tracking, something else schools are against. The only politically correct way of closing the gap is dumbing everybody down. That is why the schools are the way it is today. The only thing they cannot do anything about is racial segregation, hence the hand wringing.
I am sorry, I don't understand what "Tracking" in MCPS means and why schools are against it? Can you explain?
My other suggestion is that you should have a GT classroom in each ES (even if they are not hosting the HGC) and the HGC curriculum and extra enrichment and course material should be provided to them. This is ES, there will not be an impact on GPA if these kids are not successful.
Infact, I am thinking that if MCPS just puts their entire HGC academic content, hw, projects etc., online, for everyone to see (and follow at home if they choose), there will be no problems. As good as the magnet programs are, they are not nothing special than what is the regular curriculum in most academically advanced countries.
In bolded -- having a separate GT class within the host school for the neighborhood kids only is tracking. It is separating out kids within the school. MCPS doesn't want to do this. They used to do this with reading/math by having pullouts, but they stopped doing that. They had to add Compacted Math program when a lot of parents raised a huge stink about not allowing kids to accelerate in math. That was mcps' one capitulation on tracking.