Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps they should modify the criteria and make it so that 80 percent of the spots are reserved for kids with 95 percent plus and 20 percent of the spots are reserved for 85-95.

Maybe it'll be more palatable to MCPS and BOE if this ratio was 50/50.

I am wondering why not include all kids in the lottery and just pick and send them to regional program? why do you even have a 85% threshold when 99 the percentile is assigned to high FARM school with no local cohort and 85th percentil is placed in regional program? Why is MCPS putting some kids at a disadvantage while promoting others? Isn't that discrimination?

There are long lasting implications to what MCPS is doing to these kids. These future leaders are going to grow up, thinking that hardwork and merit does not matter. I am more worried about that than GT programs admission. On the other side, kids who are benefitting from non objective process such as lottery aka will believe in luck more than determination and hardwork as they see that hard work and higher scores did not matter after all to get into GT programs.

I dunno, I don’t think I’m with you on this one. My 99 map kid didn’t work hard for that score. It’s more luck that his brain works in a way that scores well on these types of tests. GT programs were never designed for the hardest working students. Giftedness has nothing to do with determination.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps they should modify the criteria and make it so that 80 percent of the spots are reserved for kids with 95 percent plus and 20 percent of the spots are reserved for 85-95.

Maybe it'll be more palatable to MCPS and BOE if this ratio was 50/50.

I am wondering why not include all kids in the lottery and just pick and send them to regional program? why do you even have a 85% threshold when 99 the percentile is assigned to high FARM school with no local cohort and 85th percentil is placed in regional program? Why is MCPS putting some kids at a disadvantage while promoting others? Isn't that discrimination?

There are long lasting implications to what MCPS is doing to these kids. These future leaders are going to grow up, thinking that hardwork and merit does not matter. I am more worried about that than GT programs admission. On the other side, kids who are benefitting from non objective process such as lottery aka will believe in luck more than determination and hardwork as they see that hard work and higher scores did not matter after all to get into GT programs.

I dunno, I don’t think I’m with you on this one. My 99 map kid didn’t work hard for that score. It’s more luck that his brain works in a way that scores well on these types of tests. GT programs were never designed for the hardest working students. Giftedness has nothing to do with determination.

Perhaps your case is different from many of us. This is because many parents look at consistency of higher achievements and growth rate over multiple years not just one test score as you seems to indicate. So if you want to attribute luck in liew of hard work and determination of kids who are driven to achieve academic success, then we can respectfully agree to disagree.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps they should modify the criteria and make it so that 80 percent of the spots are reserved for kids with 95 percent plus and 20 percent of the spots are reserved for 85-95.

Maybe it'll be more palatable to MCPS and BOE if this ratio was 50/50.

I am wondering why not include all kids in the lottery and just pick and send them to regional program? why do you even have a 85% threshold when 99 the percentile is assigned to high FARM school with no local cohort and 85th percentil is placed in regional program? Why is MCPS putting some kids at a disadvantage while promoting others? Isn't that discrimination?

There are long lasting implications to what MCPS is doing to these kids. These future leaders are going to grow up, thinking that hardwork and merit does not matter. I am more worried about that than GT programs admission. On the other side, kids who are benefitting from non objective process such as lottery aka will believe in luck more than determination and hardwork as they see that hard work and higher scores did not matter after all to get into GT programs.

I dunno, I don’t think I’m with you on this one. My 99 map kid didn’t work hard for that score. It’s more luck that his brain works in a way that scores well on these types of tests. GT programs were never designed for the hardest working students. Giftedness has nothing to do with determination.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The current system of relying on MAP Scores and Grades is less equitable than relying SOLELY on a CogAT test. (Preferably not the 30-question screener that focuses only on analogies, but the full test). Other districts (Broward FL) have found "diamonds in the rough" that way. From there, however, you don't focus only on 99%ile kids from privileged backgrounds, so there is still room for controversy. (Because even the best intentioned parents focus advocacy so keenly on the results for their own child, or children just like them.)

Both MAP scores and grades evaluate how kids are doing in a system that may be stacked against them in various ways. Even the most privileged gifted kid can have negative grade results for any number of reasons, some directly related to their giftedness.

Having more seats would help. But if the pro-magnet crowd takes the stance that whatever happens in a home school is never going to be good enough, the effort to get more seats gets derailed quickly.

I'm the PP who is frustrated that MCPS gave up on the system they pledged to implement four years ago, and this is exactly right. MAP scores reward out-of-school learning, as they are a test of exposure, not aptitude. Grades are subjective, and gifted kids can end up with a single B (or more) for a variety of reasons that should not disqualify them from the magnets.

However, a purely cogat-based approach has a substantial downside, which I'll call the NYC Trap, in which the magnets become the purview of the highly prepped rather than the gifted. That's what NYC saw with it's "gifted" elementary schools. Kids were prepping for a test administered at 3 or 4, creating a whole industry of test prep for tiny kids.

Totally agree with you and the PP who wished they hadn't given up on improving the system. Also, many people did prep for the CogAT . Both my kids went through the manget and there are prep centers and tutors for the CogAT and most of those admitted went through some form of it according to my childrens' classmates.

You can't prep for the cogat. Why do you keep brining up prepping? Most kids that prepped did not get in anywhere. The kids that prepped and got in probably would have gotten in anyway. Why are you so obsessed with assigning blame to a certain group of people? Why do people on this board think it's okay to bash Asian Americans but not other minorities and pretend that you are these gracious people who really want to help poor minorities. I have news for you. In NYC Asian Americans are the poor minorities. The kids going to magnets who are Asian are almost all FARMS.

You *can* prep for CogAT or intelligence tests, but not as effectively as for exposure-biased tests like MAP. They should (and did) have a broad, multi-factored set of criteria and guardrail algorithms to balance against this. They didn't last year and don't this year. It wasn't perfect -- any system has flaws -- but it would be better.

You're injecting the implication that the PP is anti-Asian instead of anti-test-prep when related to accessing a public service. Quite inappropriate to paint them that way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps they should modify the criteria and make it so that 80 percent of the spots are reserved for kids with 95 percent plus and 20 percent of the spots are reserved for 85-95.

Maybe it'll be more palatable to MCPS and BOE if this ratio was 50/50.

I am wondering why not include all kids in the lottery and just pick and send them to regional program? why do you even have a 85% threshold when 99 the percentile is assigned to high FARM school with no local cohort and 85th percentil is placed in regional program? Why is MCPS putting some kids at a disadvantage while promoting others? Isn't that discrimination?

There are long lasting implications to what MCPS is doing to these kids. These future leaders are going to grow up, thinking that hardwork and merit does not matter. I am more worried about that than GT programs admission. On the other side, kids who are benefitting from non objective process such as lottery aka will believe in luck more than determination and hardwork as they see that hard work and higher scores did not matter after all to get into GT programs.

I dunno, I don’t think I’m with you on this one. My 99 map kid didn’t work hard for that score. It’s more luck that his brain works in a way that scores well on these types of tests. GT programs were never designed for the hardest working students. Giftedness has nothing to do with determination.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps they should modify the criteria and make it so that 80 percent of the spots are reserved for kids with 95 percent plus and 20 percent of the spots are reserved for 85-95.

Maybe it'll be more palatable to MCPS and BOE if this ratio was 50/50.

I am wondering why not include all kids in the lottery and just pick and send them to regional program? why do you even have a 85% threshold when 99 the percentile is assigned to high FARM school with no local cohort and 85th percentil is placed in regional program? Why is MCPS putting some kids at a disadvantage while promoting others? Isn't that discrimination?

There are long lasting implications to what MCPS is doing to these kids. These future leaders are going to grow up, thinking that hardwork and merit does not matter. I am more worried about that than GT programs admission. On the other side, kids who are benefitting from non objective process such as lottery aka will believe in luck more than determination and hardwork as they see that hard work and higher scores did not matter after all to get into GT programs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps they should modify the criteria and make it so that 80 percent of the spots are reserved for kids with 95 percent plus and 20 percent of the spots are reserved for 85-95.

Maybe it'll be more palatable to MCPS and BOE if this ratio was 50/50.

I am wondering why not include all kids in the lottery and just pick and send them to regional program? why do you even have a 85% threshold when 99 the percentile is assigned to high FARM school with no local cohort and 85th percentil is placed in regional program? Why is MCPS putting some kids at a disadvantage while promoting others? Isn't that discrimination?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps they should modify the criteria and make it so that 80 percent of the spots are reserved for kids with 95 percent plus and 20 percent of the spots are reserved for 85-95.

Maybe it'll be more palatable to MCPS and BOE if this ratio was 50/50.

I am wondering why not include all kids in the lottery and just pick and send them to regional program? why do you even have a 85% threshold when 99 the percentile is assigned to high FARM school with no local cohort and 85th percentil is placed in regional program? Why is MCPS putting some kids at a disadvantage while promoting others? Isn't that discrimination?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps they should modify the criteria and make it so that 80 percent of the spots are reserved for kids with 95 percent plus and 20 percent of the spots are reserved for 85-95.

Maybe it'll be more palatable to MCPS and BOE if this ratio was 50/50.

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps they should modify the criteria and make it so that 80 percent of the spots are reserved for kids with 95 percent plus and 20 percent of the spots are reserved for 85-95.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The current system of relying on MAP Scores and Grades is less equitable than relying SOLELY on a CogAT test. (Preferably not the 30-question screener that focuses only on analogies, but the full test). Other districts (Broward FL) have found "diamonds in the rough" that way. From there, however, you don't focus only on 99%ile kids from privileged backgrounds, so there is still room for controversy. (Because even the best intentioned parents focus advocacy so keenly on the results for their own child, or children just like them.)

Both MAP scores and grades evaluate how kids are doing in a system that may be stacked against them in various ways. Even the most privileged gifted kid can have negative grade results for any number of reasons, some directly related to their giftedness.

Having more seats would help. But if the pro-magnet crowd takes the stance that whatever happens in a home school is never going to be good enough, the effort to get more seats gets derailed quickly.

I'm the PP who is frustrated that MCPS gave up on the system they pledged to implement four years ago, and this is exactly right. MAP scores reward out-of-school learning, as they are a test of exposure, not aptitude. Grades are subjective, and gifted kids can end up with a single B (or more) for a variety of reasons that should not disqualify them from the magnets.

However, a purely cogat-based approach has a substantial downside, which I'll call the NYC Trap, in which the magnets become the purview of the highly prepped rather than the gifted. That's what NYC saw with it's "gifted" elementary schools. Kids were prepping for a test administered at 3 or 4, creating a whole industry of test prep for tiny kids.

You can't prep for the cogat. Why do you keep brining up prepping? Most kids that prepped did not get in anywhere. The kids that prepped and got in probably would have gotten in anyway. Why are you so obsessed with assigning blame to a certain group of people? Why do people on this board think it's okay to bash Asian Americans but not other minorities and pretend that you are these gracious people who really want to help poor minorities. I have news for you. In NYC Asian Americans are the poor minorities. The kids going to magnets who are Asian are almost all FARMS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The current system of relying on MAP Scores and Grades is less equitable than relying SOLELY on a CogAT test. (Preferably not the 30-question screener that focuses only on analogies, but the full test). Other districts (Broward FL) have found "diamonds in the rough" that way. From there, however, you don't focus only on 99%ile kids from privileged backgrounds, so there is still room for controversy. (Because even the best intentioned parents focus advocacy so keenly on the results for their own child, or children just like them.)

Both MAP scores and grades evaluate how kids are doing in a system that may be stacked against them in various ways. Even the most privileged gifted kid can have negative grade results for any number of reasons, some directly related to their giftedness.

Having more seats would help. But if the pro-magnet crowd takes the stance that whatever happens in a home school is never going to be good enough, the effort to get more seats gets derailed quickly.

I'm the PP who is frustrated that MCPS gave up on the system they pledged to implement four years ago, and this is exactly right. MAP scores reward out-of-school learning, as they are a test of exposure, not aptitude. Grades are subjective, and gifted kids can end up with a single B (or more) for a variety of reasons that should not disqualify them from the magnets.

However, a purely cogat-based approach has a substantial downside, which I'll call the NYC Trap, in which the magnets become the purview of the highly prepped rather than the gifted. That's what NYC saw with it's "gifted" elementary schools. Kids were prepping for a test administered at 3 or 4, creating a whole industry of test prep for tiny kids.

You can't prep for the cogat. Why do you keep brining up prepping? Most kids that prepped did not get in anywhere. The kids that prepped and got in probably would have gotten in anyway. Why are you so obsessed with assigning blame to a certain group of people? Why do people on this board think it's okay to bash Asian Americans but not other minorities and pretend that you are these gracious people who really want to help poor minorities. I have news for you. In NYC Asian Americans are the poor minorities. The kids going to magnets who are Asian are almost all FARMS.