Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS documents clearly state that seats were allocated differently, with more directed toward students assigned to lower performing MSs. For Eastern and Takoma Park, 75 seats went to non-CES kids, 25 to CES kids. Anyone who thinks that ratio makes sense based on purely objective criteria is smoking something.

Well, it’s gotta be healthier than smoking sour grapes...

Anonymous wrote:MCPS documents clearly state that seats were allocated differently, with more directed toward students assigned to lower performing MSs. For Eastern and Takoma Park, 75 seats went to non-CES kids, 25 to CES kids. Anyone who thinks that ratio makes sense based on purely objective criteria is smoking something.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting document. I guess they determine if you have a cohort based on "receives enrichment/acceleration". the document says they are blinded to school and thus why CES students are affected more than non-CES.

This is beyond backwards. Is there any word on whether they have changed their admission process this year to make sure CES kids are not at a disadvantage?

CES kids aren't at a disadvantage. Because CES students received greater enrichment they should have higher map scores than kids who did not attend CES.

And if all that extra enrichment fails translate into higher scores then its probably a waste to send a kid to a magnet anyway.

What happened last year is kids from CES schools were passed over for kids with lower scores.

This is factually inaccurate. With the advent of universal screening, admissions got a lot more competitive.

Actually, according to the info MCPS, has put out more kids who need help keeping up with the magnet curriculum got in. So the admissions rate did go down if you count all kids who took the test as "applicants" but it sounds like more students with low(er) scores got in.

Do you have a citation or is this just more fiction?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting document. I guess they determine if you have a cohort based on "receives enrichment/acceleration". the document says they are blinded to school and thus why CES students are affected more than non-CES.

This is beyond backwards. Is there any word on whether they have changed their admission process this year to make sure CES kids are not at a disadvantage?

CES kids aren't at a disadvantage. Because CES students received greater enrichment they should have higher map scores than kids who did not attend CES.

And if all that extra enrichment fails translate into higher scores then its probably a waste to send a kid to a magnet anyway.

What happened last year is kids from CES schools were passed over for kids with lower scores.

This is factually inaccurate. With the advent of universal screening, admissions got a lot more competitive.

Don’t ever say this to a t-mon whose kid didn’t make the cut , you’ll get an earful of fictional conspiracy theories.

Anonymous wrote:I don't know about this accusation that CES kids had a tougher time as it doesn't make a lot of sense given they grouped kids by neighborhood MS but there's no fictional conspiracy.
MCPS has said very clearly that they weighed different things in the admissions process this year and that it has resulted in teachers needing to provide more support to some of the new students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting document. I guess they determine if you have a cohort based on "receives enrichment/acceleration". the document says they are blinded to school and thus why CES students are affected more than non-CES.

This is beyond backwards. Is there any word on whether they have changed their admission process this year to make sure CES kids are not at a disadvantage?

CES kids aren't at a disadvantage. Because CES students received greater enrichment they should have higher map scores than kids who did not attend CES.

And if all that extra enrichment fails translate into higher scores then its probably a waste to send a kid to a magnet anyway.

What happened last year is kids from CES schools were passed over for kids with lower scores.

This is factually inaccurate. With the advent of universal screening, admissions got a lot more competitive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting document. I guess they determine if you have a cohort based on "receives enrichment/acceleration". the document says they are blinded to school and thus why CES students are affected more than non-CES.

This is beyond backwards. Is there any word on whether they have changed their admission process this year to make sure CES kids are not at a disadvantage?

CES kids aren't at a disadvantage. Because CES students received greater enrichment they should have higher map scores than kids who did not attend CES.

And if all that extra enrichment fails translate into higher scores then its probably a waste to send a kid to a magnet anyway.

What happened last year is kids from CES schools were passed over for kids with lower scores.

This is factually inaccurate. With the advent of universal screening, admissions got a lot more competitive.

Actually, according to the info MCPS, has put out more kids who need help keeping up with the magnet curriculum got in. So the admissions rate did go down if you count all kids who took the test as "applicants" but it sounds like more students with low(er) scores got in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting document. I guess they determine if you have a cohort based on "receives enrichment/acceleration". the document says they are blinded to school and thus why CES students are affected more than non-CES.

This is beyond backwards. Is there any word on whether they have changed their admission process this year to make sure CES kids are not at a disadvantage?

CES kids aren't at a disadvantage. Because CES students received greater enrichment they should have higher map scores than kids who did not attend CES.

And if all that extra enrichment fails translate into higher scores then its probably a waste to send a kid to a magnet anyway.

What happened last year is kids from CES schools were passed over for kids with lower scores.

This is factually inaccurate. With the advent of universal screening, admissions got a lot more competitive.

Actually, according to the info MCPS, has put out more kids who need help keeping up with the magnet curriculum got in. So the admissions rate did go down if you count all kids who took the test as "applicants" but it sounds like more students with low(er) scores got in.

Exactly

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting document. I guess they determine if you have a cohort based on "receives enrichment/acceleration". the document says they are blinded to school and thus why CES students are affected more than non-CES.

This is beyond backwards. Is there any word on whether they have changed their admission process this year to make sure CES kids are not at a disadvantage?

CES kids aren't at a disadvantage. Because CES students received greater enrichment they should have higher map scores than kids who did not attend CES.

And if all that extra enrichment fails translate into higher scores then its probably a waste to send a kid to a magnet anyway.

What happened last year is kids from CES schools were passed over for kids with lower scores.

This is factually inaccurate. With the advent of universal screening, admissions got a lot more competitive.

Actually, according to the info MCPS, has put out more kids who need help keeping up with the magnet curriculum got in. So the admissions rate did go down if you count all kids who took the test as "applicants" but it sounds like more students with low(er) scores got in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting document. I guess they determine if you have a cohort based on "receives enrichment/acceleration". the document says they are blinded to school and thus why CES students are affected more than non-CES.

This is beyond backwards. Is there any word on whether they have changed their admission process this year to make sure CES kids are not at a disadvantage?

CES kids aren't at a disadvantage. Because CES students received greater enrichment they should have higher map scores than kids who did not attend CES.

And if all that extra enrichment fails translate into higher scores then its probably a waste to send a kid to a magnet anyway.

What happened last year is kids from CES schools were passed over for kids with lower scores.

This is factually inaccurate. With the advent of universal screening, admissions got a lot more competitive.

Anonymous wrote:Continue to advocate for more classes at your local middle school to provide more enrichment for the cohort of highly able learners. We should not be satisfied with 1 math and 1 history class. This is not the same as the magnet curriculum at either of the magnet schools.