Anonymous wrote:My issue with GT testing in mcps is that they’re not actually screening for giftedness. There is no cognitive assessment. They cherry pick some random grades from marking period 2 and use that to determine who is GT? Lol. No. That’a screening for good grades.
Gifted children aren’t necessarily straight A students. They are neurodivergent, they learn differently. Little to no repetition. Intuitive. Creative. Out of the box thinkers. Often intense, sensitive, emotional, passionate. They often struggle with the pace of classroom instruction. Being gifted is both wonderful and difficult.
According to mcps, gifted = a kid with good grades
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:quick update. My DC who wasn’t ‘gifted’ last year due to missing data is now ‘gifted’ according to mcps. The MAP threshold for both reading and math is 80th percentile. Plus a score of 5 on some math and ELA assessments. Thought this might be helpful to someone.
PP -- what grade is your DC in?
Anonymous wrote:quick update. My DC who wasn’t ‘gifted’ last year due to missing data is now ‘gifted’ according to mcps. The MAP threshold for both reading and math is 80th percentile. Plus a score of 5 on some math and ELA assessments. Thought this might be helpful to someone.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:quick update. My DC who wasn’t ‘gifted’ last year due to missing data is now ‘gifted’ according to mcps. The MAP threshold for both reading and math is 80th percentile. Plus a score of 5 on some math and ELA assessments. Thought this might be helpful to someone.
It is amazing to me that MCPS continues to misunderstand how to use “multiple measures” in identifying students for enriched/accelerated instruction. You’re supposed to use all the measures holistically, giving students who may not perform well in certain ways the opportunity to show their potential and be scooped up and given a chance in accelerated instruction. Instead, MCPS uses single data points to eliminate students and gatekeep opportunities in spite of otherwise compelling data. To make matters worse, schools point fingers at Central Office and Central office points fingers at schools, leaving families gaslit about the process and criteria, and giving some students at some schools access and others with sometimes more compelling data barriers. There’s this underlying assumption that any parents questioning the inconsistencies are entitled/demanding/annoying. Really toxic and quite frankly completely unnecessary and in total opposition to all of the district’s stated and published goals on the subject.
Spot on.
Anonymous wrote:I’ve heard the GT designation helps MS and HS know which classes to put the students in, so it’s not useless.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am curious if a child is tested gifted by some legit evaluation tests outside of school, and parents give them math/reading enrichment outside of school through tutors/parents. Is it considered cheating? My kid was tested 2-3 grades avove level before any enrichment on math/reading, and now the gap is getting wider. I hesitate to share the IQ test result & enrichment info. with classroom teachers about it because I don't know what they would think of parents or my kid. Developmental pediatrician recommends enrichment and we follow their recommendation.
Not cheating. Just not recognized/supported by MCPS.
You're fortunate to be able to provide the outside enrichment. Part of the problem with MCPS's approach is that those who aren't as fortunate might have the ability, but don't get identified beacuse they lack the exposure on which MCPS identification largely is based.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The rampant misinformation on so many threads on DCUM is terrible. The GT letter is used by home schools to identify kids for enrichment in math and/or literacy. This enrichment is not lottery based.
This is just PR. Have you been to classrooms or spoke to your child at MCPS? There is no enrichment happening at the local schools anymore. No cohorts for reading and math either. I have to wonder what enrichment are you talking about?
Yes, my child has had pull outs for math, and literacy enrichment was through small group. Could it be better? Absolutely. The point is that he was identified for enrichment based on the GT letter. The quality of enrichment leaves much too be desired, but it's better than nothing and he enjoyed the pullouts.
GT designation is not meaningless. That’s what we had thought though that its meaningless. Unfortunately it is used for literacy enrichment and assigning reading groups. My DC has been a strong reader from a very young age. Was always placed in the highest reading groups from K-2, but did not get GT designation (because if missing data) in 2nd and was blindly placed in the lowest group in 3rd grade. When I approached the teacher I was told only the GT kids get to read chapter books in reading groups. It didn’t matter that my DC had a high MAP R score or the fact that DC was actually an awesome reader. So yeah the designation is not meaningless. It is being used to widen the achievement gap between the lowest and the highest reading groups.
What data was missing?
Anyway if your kid is an amazing reader then she's already on the high side of the achievement gap and doesn't need one more book per quarter.
Completely off. The system is supposed to address the need. If a kid is ahead of their peers, it's not OK to have them coast if they show ability/intereat. That was the whole purpose of the state legislation, to require the school districts to identify that ability and meet the associated need.
MCPS pays it lip service to the state requirement with the SIPPI/GT Identification process, but neither uses measures appropriately in identification nor employs enrichments appropriately to meet the need. They have CES, ELC, accelerated math, criteria-based MS magnets and associated local courses (AIM/HIGH/whatever they might do for science & language), but these aren't linked to GT ID (placement is, generally, more restrictive), are scarce compared to the GT population and appear to be pretty variable in their implementation from school to school.
Anonymous wrote:I am curious if a child is tested gifted by some legit evaluation tests outside of school, and parents give them math/reading enrichment outside of school through tutors/parents. Is it considered cheating? My kid was tested 2-3 grades avove level before any enrichment on math/reading, and now the gap is getting wider. I hesitate to share the IQ test result & enrichment info. with classroom teachers about it because I don't know what they would think of parents or my kid. Developmental pediatrician recommends enrichment and we follow their recommendation.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The rampant misinformation on so many threads on DCUM is terrible. The GT letter is used by home schools to identify kids for enrichment in math and/or literacy. This enrichment is not lottery based.
This is just PR. Have you been to classrooms or spoke to your child at MCPS? There is no enrichment happening at the local schools anymore. No cohorts for reading and math either. I have to wonder what enrichment are you talking about?
Yes, my child has had pull outs for math, and literacy enrichment was through small group. Could it be better? Absolutely. The point is that he was identified for enrichment based on the GT letter. The quality of enrichment leaves much too be desired, but it's better than nothing and he enjoyed the pullouts.
GT designation is not meaningless. That’s what we had thought though that its meaningless. Unfortunately it is used for literacy enrichment and assigning reading groups. My DC has been a strong reader from a very young age. Was always placed in the highest reading groups from K-2, but did not get GT designation (because if missing data) in 2nd and was blindly placed in the lowest group in 3rd grade. When I approached the teacher I was told only the GT kids get to read chapter books in reading groups. It didn’t matter that my DC had a high MAP R score or the fact that DC was actually an awesome reader. So yeah the designation is not meaningless. It is being used to widen the achievement gap between the lowest and the highest reading groups.
What data was missing?
Anyway if your kid is an amazing reader then she's already on the high side of the achievement gap and doesn't need one more book per quarter.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:quick update. My DC who wasn’t ‘gifted’ last year due to missing data is now ‘gifted’ according to mcps. The MAP threshold for both reading and math is 80th percentile. Plus a score of 5 on some math and ELA assessments. Thought this might be helpful to someone.
It is amazing to me that MCPS continues to misunderstand how to use “multiple measures” in identifying students for enriched/accelerated instruction. You’re supposed to use all the measures holistically, giving students who may not perform well in certain ways the opportunity to show their potential and be scooped up and given a chance in accelerated instruction. Instead, MCPS uses single data points to eliminate students and gatekeep opportunities in spite of otherwise compelling data. To make matters worse, schools point fingers at Central Office and Central office points fingers at schools, leaving families gaslit about the process and criteria, and giving some students at some schools access and others with sometimes more compelling data barriers. There’s this underlying assumption that any parents questioning the inconsistencies are entitled/demanding/annoying. Really toxic and quite frankly completely unnecessary and in total opposition to all of the district’s stated and published goals on the subject.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The rampant misinformation on so many threads on DCUM is terrible. The GT letter is used by home schools to identify kids for enrichment in math and/or literacy. This enrichment is not lottery based.
This is just PR. Have you been to classrooms or spoke to your child at MCPS? There is no enrichment happening at the local schools anymore. No cohorts for reading and math either. I have to wonder what enrichment are you talking about?
Yes, my child has had pull outs for math, and literacy enrichment was through small group. Could it be better? Absolutely. The point is that he was identified for enrichment based on the GT letter. The quality of enrichment leaves much too be desired, but it's better than nothing and he enjoyed the pullouts.
GT designation is not meaningless. That’s what we had thought though that its meaningless. Unfortunately it is used for literacy enrichment and assigning reading groups. My DC has been a strong reader from a very young age. Was always placed in the highest reading groups from K-2, but did not get GT designation (because if missing data) in 2nd and was blindly placed in the lowest group in 3rd grade. When I approached the teacher I was told only the GT kids get to read chapter books in reading groups. It didn’t matter that my DC had a high MAP R score or the fact that DC was actually an awesome reader. So yeah the designation is not meaningless. It is being used to widen the achievement gap between the lowest and the highest reading groups.
What data was missing?
Anyway if your kid is an amazing reader then she's already on the high side of the achievement gap and doesn't need one more book per quarter.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The rampant misinformation on so many threads on DCUM is terrible. The GT letter is used by home schools to identify kids for enrichment in math and/or literacy. This enrichment is not lottery based.
This is just PR. Have you been to classrooms or spoke to your child at MCPS? There is no enrichment happening at the local schools anymore. No cohorts for reading and math either. I have to wonder what enrichment are you talking about?
Yes, my child has had pull outs for math, and literacy enrichment was through small group. Could it be better? Absolutely. The point is that he was identified for enrichment based on the GT letter. The quality of enrichment leaves much too be desired, but it's better than nothing and he enjoyed the pullouts.
GT designation is not meaningless. That’s what we had thought though that its meaningless. Unfortunately it is used for literacy enrichment and assigning reading groups. My DC has been a strong reader from a very young age. Was always placed in the highest reading groups from K-2, but did not get GT designation (because if missing data) in 2nd and was blindly placed in the lowest group in 3rd grade. When I approached the teacher I was told only the GT kids get to read chapter books in reading groups. It didn’t matter that my DC had a high MAP R score or the fact that DC was actually an awesome reader. So yeah the designation is not meaningless. It is being used to widen the achievement gap between the lowest and the highest reading groups.
What data was missing?
Anyway if your kid is an amazing reader then she's already on the high side of the achievement gap and doesn't need one more book per quarter.