More seats, for sure. There are plenty who would benefit from enrichment -- it shouldn't be the top x%, where x is a fairly small number that fits an artificially-low number of seats made available. They thumb their noses at state requirements by having the separate SIPPI process, but tying that to much more watered-down options for within-standard-curricula (but poorly and inconsistently used) enrichments, as opposed to more holistic enrichment programs (e.g., CES & criteria-based magnets).

CogAT can be gamed, but much less so than MAP, which, for any kid with moderately high ability, is so much more about exposure (outside tutoring, anyone?) than innate capacity to learn/need to stretch beyond the standard curriculum. If anything, they've set up a less equitable system by using MAP, abandoning better paradigms that have been put forth with sounder reasoning, and have used the CovID excuse for it well beyond the one year (or maybe two) that it might have made sense.

Someone remarked about gatekeeping. I think that's a word thrown around inappropriately, and perhaps intentionally, simply making it difficult to put any identification paradigm in play, as identification, required by state law (along with programs to meet identified need), becomes a gate, itself.

There shouldn't be anything wrong with the concept of identification of learning ability, nor should there be anything wrong with the idea of providing commensurate programs. We certainly do the latter for those with great difficulties, though it seems that MCPS resists the former in some cases (I'm guessing from a combination of high cost and overzealous gaming of that system, too). The difference seems to be a combination of specificity within the statutes and a poor presumption that we don't need to worry about the needs of high flyers the way we would about others.

Implementations that allow significant gaming, inflexible/poorly targeted schemas, poor matches of available program seats (or alternate high-quality enrichments) to identified needs, etc. -- this is where the problem lies.

There's probably something out there less gameable than CogAT. Let's find it. In the meantime, let's use the known of CogAT to do something far better than the largely MAP-based system they have in place at the moment.

My kid took the COGAT last year, coming from private and applying to the SMCS magnet. So MoCo does accept for some.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lottery brought in a lot of undeserving kids into the middle school magnet programs at the expense of kids who were at the 99th percentile in MAP. Kids who would have presumably also done very well in COGAT. The lottery has diluted the quality of the magnet under the guise of diversity. Bring COGAT or some other objective testing method back.

Not necessarily. MAP tests content knowledge, not intelligence.

Agree

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lottery brought in a lot of undeserving kids into the middle school magnet programs at the expense of kids who were at the 99th percentile in MAP. Kids who would have presumably also done very well in COGAT. The lottery has diluted the quality of the magnet under the guise of diversity. Bring COGAT or some other objective testing method back.

Someone needs to sue. Higher achievement students are entitled to programs that fit their needs. Period.
The why's behind some groups not achieving as highly need to be addressed before the magnet program selection, not instead of

100% agree. The bright kids shouldn't have to suffer for the sake of equity. The teachers know who these students are and the county should do their part to ensure these kids are getting what they need by working with the schools, not at the chance of a lottery. MCPS isn't doing any of the children any favors (the URMs and the UMC). Once the kids are adults in the real world, the most qualified individual will likely get any given opportunity (unless, of course, corruption... but I digress). Jobs are not handed out by lottery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lottery brought in a lot of undeserving kids into the middle school magnet programs at the expense of kids who were at the 99th percentile in MAP. Kids who would have presumably also done very well in COGAT. The lottery has diluted the quality of the magnet under the guise of diversity. Bring COGAT or some other objective testing method back.

Someone needs to sue. Higher achievement students are entitled to programs that fit their needs. Period.
The why's behind some groups not achieving as highly need to be addressed before the magnet program selection, not instead of

The problem is that there are many more children who are high achieving who do not receive spots in the middle school magnet programs and MCPS must do something to address that issue. Why does a kid have to be in the the top.01% to get a program that suits their needs?

+1 Instead of fighting for scraps, there needs to be more seats. There are many top performing students in our county.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lottery brought in a lot of undeserving kids into the middle school magnet programs at the expense of kids who were at the 99th percentile in MAP. Kids who would have presumably also done very well in COGAT. The lottery has diluted the quality of the magnet under the guise of diversity. Bring COGAT or some other objective testing method back.

Someone needs to sue. Higher achievement students are entitled to programs that fit their needs. Period.
The why's behind some groups not achieving as highly need to be addressed before the magnet program selection, not instead of

The problem is that there are many more children who are high achieving who do not receive spots in the middle school magnet programs and MCPS must do something to address that issue. Why does a kid have to be in the the top.01% to get a program that suits their needs?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lottery brought in a lot of undeserving kids into the middle school magnet programs at the expense of kids who were at the 99th percentile in MAP. Kids who would have presumably also done very well in COGAT. The lottery has diluted the quality of the magnet under the guise of diversity. Bring COGAT or some other objective testing method back.

Not necessarily. MAP tests content knowledge, not intelligence.

Same with CogAT. Very easy to prep for like SATs.

CogAT tests reasoning.

Which can be practiced and improved with coaching.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kids who did best on the COGAT were also the ones who did a ton of prep and coaching. It's for sure being gamed.

Since when is studying/practicing considered gaming?

Because the assumption is that cogat tests “natural “ ability. But this ability can easily be learned. UMCs pretend to agree it tests for natural ability but then prep like crazy, thereby gaming the system.

This is also likey why many institutions are phasing out these types of tests.

Anonymous wrote:The kids who did best on the COGAT were also the ones who did a ton of prep and coaching. It's for sure being gamed.

Some people see that as a feature, not a bug, because it allows families with resources to gain an advantage on admissions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kids who did best on the COGAT were also the ones who did a ton of prep and coaching. It's for sure being gamed.

Since when is studying/practicing considered gaming?

Because the assumption is that cogat tests “natural “ ability. But this ability can easily be learned. UMCs pretend to agree it tests for natural ability but then prep like crazy, thereby gaming the system.

Anonymous wrote:The kids who did best on the COGAT were also the ones who did a ton of prep and coaching. It's for sure being gamed.

Since when is studying/practicing considered gaming?

The kids who did best on the COGAT were also the ones who did a ton of prep and coaching. It's for sure being gamed.

Anonymous wrote:Just among my own kids with similar background and resources, everyone did differently on COGAT, PSAT and SAT. I'm not sure if its just a test of knowledge.

This is true.

If it were just about SES level and resources, then everyone at Whitman would be a high scorer on the SAT.

That’s actually not the case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lottery brought in a lot of undeserving kids into the middle school magnet programs at the expense of kids who were at the 99th percentile in MAP. Kids who would have presumably also done very well in COGAT. The lottery has diluted the quality of the magnet under the guise of diversity. Bring COGAT or some other objective testing method back.

Not necessarily. MAP tests content knowledge, not intelligence.

Same with CogAT. Very easy to prep for like SATs.

CogAT tests reasoning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lottery brought in a lot of undeserving kids into the middle school magnet programs at the expense of kids who were at the 99th percentile in MAP. Kids who would have presumably also done very well in COGAT. The lottery has diluted the quality of the magnet under the guise of diversity. Bring COGAT or some other objective testing method back.

Not necessarily. MAP tests content knowledge, not intelligence.

Same with CogAT. Very easy to prep for like SATs.

Who in their right mind preps for COGAT? We didn't even know what it is.

All I know is a third of TJ's class a few years back came from one single prep center and in years past, there were several well-known tutors locally for CogAT. I think the going rate was $150/hour. I know just taking a few practice tests helped my child improve their score by over 20%.