Anonymous wrote:They could also change the FARMS bands. I think one year they had 5 and then they changed it to 3. There's a lot of ways to manipulate the numbers to get your desired result.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I know MCPS doesn’t publicize this info, but does anyone know the approximate cutoff for MAP scores to be placed in the lottery pools for the MS magnets like Eastern/TPMS/Clemente etc?
95th? 90th?
Thanks!
The percentiles given in prior posts, which can be seen as the ballpark estimate you requested, have been for a past year, 2021-22, per the MCPS response to the MCCPTA GEC request. Within the current lottery eligibility criteria, the percentile can (and did) change a bit each year for each school based on:
1) Whether the school's FARMS rate changed enough to put them in a new local-norming group (e.g., from low-moderate FARMS to low FARMS), and
2) The locally normed 85th percentile RIT score for that group. These also can be different between MAP-R, for the Humanities magnet, and MAP-M, for the Math magnet.
A change in the first factor likely would make more of a difference than a change in the second. They also could go with a higher locally normed target percentile (e.g., 90th instead of 85th).
There is a referenced, but unspecified, lower local norm threshold for students receiving services (individual FARMS, IEP, 504, EML); board docs indicate it was 70th percentile for the CES lottery last year, but doesn't specify the MS lottery percentile.
The precise answers aren't yet established for this year, and probably won't be made known by MCPS even when they are without an MPIA request.
For reference, local norming takes the percentage of students in the grade across the county who score at least at the target national percentile, per 2020 NWEA norms (norms won't be updated for another 2 years), and then identifies the RIT score met or exceeded for each local-norming FARMS-rate group by the same percentage of students in that grade at schools within that group.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That is a massive difference. I knew it was big but a child who is 93rd percentile in math is not at all the same as a child who is 60th percentile in math. I support a lot of what MCPS is trying to do with equity but a child who is 60th percentile in math does not need to be in a math magnet.
I completely agree. 60th isn’t even ballpark.
It depends. With programs like CES, similar SES schools are typically grouped to the same centers.
You'd think they can see where this was successful and not and refine the percentiles accordingly.
For example, I have a kid at TPMS magnet. I do not have access to the data, but it seems like each year, they've refined the process to improve the selection. The first year there was a fairly high attrition rate because the process was frankly kind of bad especially from the high FARMS schools.
How do you refine a lottery?
The program is refining by: low FARMS students declining to attended, and the program softening to accommodate the less able/prepared students.
Anonymous wrote:They could also change the FARMS bands. I think one year they had 5 and then they changed it to 3. There's a lot of ways to manipulate the numbers to get your desired result.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They need to bring back the Cogat which is not based on achievement but on potential.
Yes, it was so easy to prep kids for this and made it much easier to game.
Game what?
The cutoffs are so low that almost anyone who attended Compacted Math (andany who don't) qualifies for the lottery
Anonymous wrote:I know MCPS doesn’t publicize this info, but does anyone know the approximate cutoff for MAP scores to be placed in the lottery pools for the MS magnets like Eastern/TPMS/Clemente etc?
95th? 90th?
Thanks!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That is a massive difference. I knew it was big but a child who is 93rd percentile in math is not at all the same as a child who is 60th percentile in math. I support a lot of what MCPS is trying to do with equity but a child who is 60th percentile in math does not need to be in a math magnet.
I completely agree. 60th isn’t even ballpark.
+1
It just waters down the magnet and stresses out kids who are in no way prepared for them level of rigor. I mean these are kids who wouldn’t get into AIM at their home school but are expected to do even higher level math at the magnet? That is not serving anyone.
FWIW my anxious kid with a 6th grade MAP in the 270s is finding it a challenge and is convinced most of the other kids are more advanced than they are. No evidence of kids out of their depth.
Your child may have anxiety issues unrelated to math, since your child is already achieving most of the objectives of Algebra and Geometry.
Which part is challenging, the math or the computer science or some other part?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That is a massive difference. I knew it was big but a child who is 93rd percentile in math is not at all the same as a child who is 60th percentile in math. I support a lot of what MCPS is trying to do with equity but a child who is 60th percentile in math does not need to be in a math magnet.
I completely agree. 60th isn’t even ballpark.
It depends. With programs like CES, similar SES schools are typically grouped to the same centers.
You'd think they can see where this was successful and not and refine the percentiles accordingly.
For example, I have a kid at TPMS magnet. I do not have access to the data, but it seems like each year, they've refined the process to improve the selection. The first year there was a fairly high attrition rate because the process was frankly kind of bad especially from the high FARMS schools.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They need to bring back the Cogat which is not based on achievement but on potential.
Yes, it was so easy to prep kids for this and made it much easier to game.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That is a massive difference. I knew it was big but a child who is 93rd percentile in math is not at all the same as a child who is 60th percentile in math. I support a lot of what MCPS is trying to do with equity but a child who is 60th percentile in math does not need to be in a math magnet.
I completely agree. 60th isn’t even ballpark.
+1
It just waters down the magnet and stresses out kids who are in no way prepared for them level of rigor. I mean these are kids who wouldn’t get into AIM at their home school but are expected to do even higher level math at the magnet? That is not serving anyone.
FWIW my anxious kid with a 6th grade MAP in the 270s is finding it a challenge and is convinced most of the other kids are more advanced than they are. No evidence of kids out of their depth.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They need to bring back the Cogat which is not based on achievement but on potential.
Yes, it was so easy to prep kids for this and made it much easier to game.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That is a massive difference. I knew it was big but a child who is 93rd percentile in math is not at all the same as a child who is 60th percentile in math. I support a lot of what MCPS is trying to do with equity but a child who is 60th percentile in math does not need to be in a math magnet.
I completely agree. 60th isn’t even ballpark.
+1
It just waters down the magnet and stresses out kids who are in no way prepared for them level of rigor. I mean these are kids who wouldn’t get into AIM at their home school but are expected to do even higher level math at the magnet? That is not serving anyone.
FWIW my anxious kid with a 6th grade MAP in the 270s is finding it a challenge and is convinced most of the other kids are more advanced than they are. No evidence of kids out of their depth.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That is a massive difference. I knew it was big but a child who is 93rd percentile in math is not at all the same as a child who is 60th percentile in math. I support a lot of what MCPS is trying to do with equity but a child who is 60th percentile in math does not need to be in a math magnet.
I completely agree. 60th isn’t even ballpark.
+1
It just waters down the magnet and stresses out kids who are in no way prepared for them level of rigor. I mean these are kids who wouldn’t get into AIM at their home school but are expected to do even higher level math at the magnet? That is not serving anyone.