I don't know what you mean by "impeccable" but if you call the office responsible for the Center program, they will tell you in no uncertain terms that no such reserved slots exist. If they do, it is an informal practice and contrary to established rules.

Nonsense. Office secretaries don't know what they are talking about.
Try this exercise: How many home students per year enter the home HGC? You will find at my HGC, the number of home students/year has been constant f(by design) for the last 7 years. Of course, a smattering understanding of probability and statistics confirms what the Principal and teachers at the school have advised us in the past. Now in some HGC the home school students don't have any interest in going to a Center program. Perhaps your region of the County fits this pattern.

Anonymous wrote:Students from the entire county compete for the first 100 slots.

Students from the TPMS district only compete for the other 25 slots.

Moreover, if only e.g. 17 of those 25 kids selected meet the same criteria as the first 100, the admission committee still has to take 8 more to fill the 25 in-district slots.

By definition, it is less competitive to get into the latter group than the former.

I don't think anybody is denying that it's (somewhat) easier for kids who live inbounds to get into TPMS magnet, or into the HGCs in some other areas that reserve spots.

What we're arguing with is that there's a significant difference in ability between the out-of-boundary kids and the in-boundary kids. Case in point - your example assuming that 8 in-boundary kids (1/3 of in-boundary kids) at the TPMS magnet are somehow subpar seems exaggerated. Plus, what does subpar mean in this case? The school wouldn't do anybody any favors if it accepted kids who couldn't do the program and flunked out, so I truly doubt it is accepting kids who are significantly below the accepted average test scores, or below the lower bound of scores for out-of-boundary kids.

And, as I said, the kids themselves don't notice the difference in performance. According to my magnet kid.

But probably the most important thing is that the TPMS magnet itself appears to have done a cost-benefit. They think the benefits to the community outweigh the costs of any (theorized) lower performance. Specifically, in a lot of these immersion and other programs, there is a lot of hostility gbetween magnet/program and local kids, and TPMS has avoided this by including in-boundary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Makes a lot of sense. There are always slots reseerved for the home school and/or region for all magnets in MCPS even the HGC. The school that host in-house HGCs have fixed number of slots on competitive basis for their own home students. For example, CSES typically reserves 5 slots for students from CS in the HGC.

Not true. I actually spoke with the HGC office about this, and it is not the case.

What is your source for this info?

Well, my child went into the HGC at his home school from a lower grade. The number of reserved slots for the home school was communicated to his parents and other parents from on high/top down to home room teachers in parent-teacher conferences..a full year in advance. I have no need of your trust or buy in. I know first hand what I talk about. My sources are impeccable on this point.

I don't know what you mean by "impeccable" but if you call the office responsible for the Center program, they will tell you in no uncertain terms that no such reserved slots exist. If they do, it is an informal practice and contrary to established rules.

Anonymous wrote:
Makes a lot of sense. There are always slots reseerved for the home school and/or region for all magnets in MCPS even the HGC. The school that host in-house HGCs have fixed number of slots on competitive basis for their own home students. For example, CSES typically reserves 5 slots for students from CS in the HGC.

Not true. I actually spoke with the HGC office about this, and it is not the case.

What is your source for this info?

Well, my child went into the HGC at his home school from a lower grade. The number of reserved slots for the home school was communicated to his parents and other parents from on high/top down to home room teachers in parent-teacher conferences..a full year in advance. I have no need of your trust or buy in. I know first hand what I talk about. My sources are impeccable on this point.

Anonymous wrote:THey implied at the orientation session that they do some gender balancing so probably a girl has a better chance of getting in because fewer girls apply.

However. There are 800 applicants for 100 spots plus 25 additional spots that go to cluster kids. So the odds are not high. By all means apply but don't make it the only acceptable option.

Odd, but at the Eastern Magnet meeting, I came away with the opposite impression -- that gender is not taken into account in the application process. What was said was that more girls apply at Eastern, so more girls get into Eastern. More boys apply to Takoma, so more boys get in to Takoma. Both programs are unbalanced in terms of gender and this is something for the applicant to consider. Gender can not be the basis for deciding to pick one child over another for a magnet slot.

Some other schools like Loiderman consider FARMS as part of the application, but not Takoma or Eastern. FARMS can be considered because it is not an immutable characteristic, nor is poverty part of a protected class under discrimination law like race and gender can be.

What the Eastern magnet coordinator was saying was that the ratio of successful boys to boy applicants for Eastern is better because fewer apply, but that is not the same as saying their odds of getting in are better for boys. There is no fixed number of slots for boys, so the overall accepted/applied ratio remains the same.

No other magnet programs balance for gender. I have been told at other magnet meetings for the HGC that MCPS is prohibited from considering gender. MCPS was hauled up to court in the Eisenberg case which, although it was about race and racial balancing, the logic probably applies to gender as well. Denying a slot to a more-qualified female because there are already too many females in the program would be illegal. Probably only in a situation in which one can argue that a male and female applicant are exactly equal, can the admissions decision tip in favor of the underrepresented group. Thus, it is not "easier" to get in as a boy.

Really, if the child is at all interested, he should apply. It's a waste of time to game out whether he has a better "chance" to get in. Spend the time on ensuring that the application is good -- good teacher recs, good essays, good grades, good test scores. You can apply to both Takoma and Eastern at the same time.

Students from the entire county compete for the first 100 slots.

Students from the TPMS district only compete for the other 25 slots.

Moreover, if only e.g. 17 of those 25 kids selected meet the same criteria as the first 100, the admission committee still has to take 8 more to fill the 25 in-district slots.

By definition, it is less competitive to get into the latter group than the former.

Say the average test score of admitted kids is 700 and the average score of cluster kids is 500. Yes, this is a complete exaggeration of the general "slouchiness" you're insinuating the cluster kids have. But look at where even this exaggeration gets us.

Overall magnet average test score = 4/5*700 + 1/5*500 = 560 + 100 = 660.

Thus, adding 25 cluster kids who are assumed for this example to be *really slouchy* only lowers the magnet's overall, average test score by 40 points (700-660=40).

And I can tell you, because my kid goes to the magnet, that the cluster kids are not dragging down class discussions by their slouchiness. It's not like everybody is waiting for them to catch up. My understanding is that the kids themselves don't distinguish between cluster and non-cluster, because the differences in learning ability aren't obvious (and certainly not as obvious as my made-up example of 700 vs. 500).

Anonymous wrote:These above reserved slot students are no slouches compared to the imports!!

And your saying the 25 Takoma kids are slouches compared to the imports? Data, please. You can't deny others' statements and then make up your own statements.

Anonymous wrote:Makes a lot of sense. There are always slots reseerved for the home school and/or region for all magnets in MCPS even the HGC. The school that host in-house HGCs have fixed number of slots on competitive basis for their own home students. For example, CSES typically reserves 5 slots for students from CS in the HGC.

Not true. I actually spoke with the HGC office about this, and it is not the case.

What is your source for this info?

These above reserved slot students are no slouches compared to the imports!!

Makes a lot of sense. There are always slots reseerved for the home school and/or region for all magnets in MCPS even the HGC. The school that host in-house HGCs have fixed number of slots on competitive basis for their own home students. For example, CSES typically reserves 5 slots for students from CS in the HGC.

SAM2 wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[At other HGC/magnet programs] ... No preference is given to students in that cache. All applicants compete equally.

The Takoma MS magnet program is open to students from all over the county. But. For 25 slots, preference is given to students in a given zone.

But that's exactly my point. At the other HGC/magnet programs, significant preference is given to students in the cache. For example, to be admitted to Lucy Barnsley, all applicants are competing equally, but only against other students in the same cache. They are not competing against any Takoma applicants, for example.

If the Takoma magnet were operated on the same principle as Lucy Barnsley and the other magnet/HGC schools, then the Takoma neighborhood applicants would be competing only against other applicants from whatever cache Takoma inhabits. Your child, and those from other caches, would be precluded from even applying. However, as Takoma actually operates, it allows students from all over the county to apply, and forces its native-cache students to compete for spots against children from all over the county (with the limited exception of 25 out of 125 slots that are reserved for neighborhood children).

If fairness requires Takoma not to set aside 25 slots for neighborhood children, then shouldn't that same fairness permit Takoma children to compete for slots at Lucy Barnsley? Or alternatively, to prohibit students in the Lucy Barnsley cache/cluster from applying to Takoma magnet?

Maybe I'm not understanding the link between "cache" and "cluster". I appreciate your patience in trying to explain.

But that's not the same thing. The HGC programs are by definition organized regionally. They are organized by neighborhood. And for e.g. the Lucy Barnsley center, the Lucy Barnsley applicants are not given any sort of preference over kids from other elementary schools.

Not so wrt the TPMS magnet. Kids slated for TPMS are given preference in that there are slots reserved for them.

My question is, why? PP's explanation makes no sense.

Anonymous wrote:I get the impression that some posters are comparing the elementary school programs with the Takoma Park Middle School program. The elementary school gifted programs have similar entrance guidelines for kids in their regional areas, right? The TPMS program, and I'm imaging the other MS competitive programs, operate differently. I don't think the entrance policies of TPMS can be compared with the entrance policies of the elementary schools HGC programs.

Yes, exactly. The elementary school programs are organized regionally, whereas the TPMS program is open to all county residents.

There are no "reserved slots" for immediate-neighborhood elementary school applicants however.

I get the impression that some posters are comparing the elementary school programs with the Takoma Park Middle School program. The elementary school gifted programs have similar entrance guidelines for kids in their regional areas, right? The TPMS program, and I'm imaging the other MS competitive programs, operate differently. I don't think the entrance policies of TPMS can be compared with the entrance policies of the elementary schools HGC programs.

Anonymous wrote:[At other HGC/magnet programs] ... No preference is given to students in that cache. All applicants compete equally.

The Takoma MS magnet program is open to students from all over the county. But. For 25 slots, preference is given to students in a given zone.

But that's exactly my point. At the other HGC/magnet programs, significant preference is given to students in the cache. For example, to be admitted to Lucy Barnsley, all applicants are competing equally, but only against other students in the same cache. They are not competing against any Takoma applicants, for example.

If the Takoma magnet were operated on the same principle as Lucy Barnsley and the other magnet/HGC schools, then the Takoma neighborhood applicants would be competing only against other applicants from whatever cache Takoma inhabits. Your child, and those from other caches, would be precluded from even applying. However, as Takoma actually operates, it allows students from all over the county to apply, and forces its native-cache students to compete for spots against children from all over the county (with the limited exception of 25 out of 125 slots that are reserved for neighborhood children).

If fairness requires Takoma not to set aside 25 slots for neighborhood children, then shouldn't that same fairness permit Takoma children to compete for slots at Lucy Barnsley? Or alternatively, to prohibit students in the Lucy Barnsley cache/cluster from applying to Takoma magnet?

Maybe I'm not understanding the link between "cache" and "cluster". I appreciate your patience in trying to explain.