Anonymous
01/09/2019 12:20
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No conspiracy. I do think there were parents who thought they had the system figured out. Their children were sufficiently prepped and then they successfully scored high enough on the different metrics that would have been competitive in years past. But not this year.
The students who were not invited just did not score high enough because of the change.
I think the parents of those students feel cheated, but the current system is more fair in my opinion. Others have stated why over and over, so I won’t rehash. But the parents who think it’s unfair won’t ever hear it. They’ll continue to think their child was more deserving and was cheated out of a superior education because they’re [insert reason].
You are NOT listening too. Past posts said highest scorers were not invited due to cohort. You just chose to think in your way.
Which school had no students admitted “due to cohort”?
You need to ask MCPS. Another related question is that when every middle school has cohort enrichment class, why do they need to use peer cohort as a criteria?
Because there are kids in each school who are above their cohort. Those were the kids selected.
How is above defined and measured? How can a kid stand out when the school have a group of top scorers?
I think there are two scenarios. At some schools there may be clear standout students. The Cogat scores, which parents did not get but the school district definitely has, could be 99th percentile at 135 or 99th percentile at 155. In this case if both students had perfect grades and perfect scores in other admissions criteria you would take the 155 child. Given how rare that 155 kid is in the general population it's unlikely there were standouts at EVERY school. In some schools there may well have been a cluster of 20 nearly equal kids at the top. FARMS could have made the difference in this case but unclear what they did at schools where there are few FARMS students. Anecdotally, it seems pretty random.
In looking at DD's class there are a half dozen clear outliers based on information the kids share with each other about test performance. The rest are kind of clustered in the same 97th-99th percentile area similar to many kids at the home school taking the enriched classes in MS.
I think what you said makes sense. But I don’t believe this was the actual implementation. If this is the real case, why don’t MCPS report SAS instead of 99%? I remember MCPS rep said specifically all 99% were the same. Some other dcurbanmom posts cited the measurement error of SAS as reasons not to use them. It looks like people are not exactly evaluating the same policy as we have injected our own assumptions to fill out the information gap.
If this was what was done, which I think it was, then it wasn’t just separating the really high standard scores and inviting those students. MCPS looked holistically at students and their peer cohorts. If a kid was 150 in a school with a small group of 120s—then, yeah, he’s probably getting invited. If another kid is 150 with a large peer cohort in the 130s-140s—maybe not. If a third kid is a 150 with that same cohort of plenty of 140s and 150s but something stands out showing she is an outlier—maybe she gets selected.
The truth is there were kids from those schools with large peer cohorts who were invited. It just have been because they were outliers.
Anonymous
01/09/2019 12:00
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No conspiracy. I do think there were parents who thought they had the system figured out. Their children were sufficiently prepped and then they successfully scored high enough on the different metrics that would have been competitive in years past. But not this year.
The students who were not invited just did not score high enough because of the change.
I think the parents of those students feel cheated, but the current system is more fair in my opinion. Others have stated why over and over, so I won’t rehash. But the parents who think it’s unfair won’t ever hear it. They’ll continue to think their child was more deserving and was cheated out of a superior education because they’re [insert reason].
You are NOT listening too. Past posts said highest scorers were not invited due to cohort. You just chose to think in your way.
Which school had no students admitted “due to cohort”?
You need to ask MCPS. Another related question is that when every middle school has cohort enrichment class, why do they need to use peer cohort as a criteria?
Because there are kids in each school who are above their cohort. Those were the kids selected.
How is above defined and measured? How can a kid stand out when the school have a group of top scorers?
I think there are two scenarios. At some schools there may be clear standout students. The Cogat scores, which parents did not get but the school district definitely has, could be 99th percentile at 135 or 99th percentile at 155. In this case if both students had perfect grades and perfect scores in other admissions criteria you would take the 155 child. Given how rare that 155 kid is in the general population it's unlikely there were standouts at EVERY school. In some schools there may well have been a cluster of 20 nearly equal kids at the top. FARMS could have made the difference in this case but unclear what they did at schools where there are few FARMS students. Anecdotally, it seems pretty random.
In looking at DD's class there are a half dozen clear outliers based on information the kids share with each other about test performance. The rest are kind of clustered in the same 97th-99th percentile area similar to many kids at the home school taking the enriched classes in MS.
I think what you said makes sense. But I don’t believe this was the actual implementation. If this is the real case, why don’t MCPS report SAS instead of 99%? I remember MCPS rep said specifically all 99% were the same. Some other dcurbanmom posts cited the measurement error of SAS as reasons not to use them. It looks like people are not exactly evaluating the same policy as we have injected our own assumptions to fill out the information gap.
Anonymous
01/09/2019 09:52
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I thought this thread was about 4th grade?!?
Ok, here's a question. Now that universal screening was done for CES entrance, will this year's MS magnets draw more from the CESs than they did last year?
This year’s middle school magnet selection will still be drawn from students who were selected for CES via parent application. This year’s 4th graders were the first to be selected via universal screening in the TPMS/Eastern magnet area.
Ah, ok, thanks.
So next year...it seems that the CES schools will be graduating exactly the candidates that meet MCPS's new profile of who most deserves/needs the MS magnets. There will be some new arrivals to MCPS who won't have been tested yet, and some who turned down a CES offer but now want a MS magnet, and a few who somehow vastly out or underperform on the MS entrance criteria compared to what they presented at the CES level. Even so mostly one would expect the universal MS candidate process to mostly end up with the same candidates it had previously identifed as worthy of CES. Yes yes, some distortions due to application of the "cohort" scheme, but still. So relatively more of the "outliers" will come from CES pool next year than from the CES pool last and this year? It is hard to imagine being with an academic cohort in a CES for two years would do anything but make DC more of an outlier, right? So are we in a funny 2 year hiccup as the Metis report plan gets implemented?
That would be my guess, that there will be more kids from the CES pool getting in to the MS magnets.
I don't think that changes the debate over whether this new admissions process is better, or is ruining the magnets.
Remember that this year's 5th graders at the Drew and Fox Chapel CES programs were selected through universal screening (pilot program), so we may see some effects from that this year. But it may be hard to judge, since I'm unaware of previous data breaking down middle school admissions from each individual CES. On the other hand, there have always been more qualified/able children than available CES seats, so I would assume that there are still many highly able students not in a CES, even with universal screening.
Yes, and would be interesting to see who turns down offers to do test for CES and MS magnets now. The "universal screening" really isn't, of course, because the universal screening only determines who is invited to test. The students that don't accept that invitation are never actually in the "real" pool as they are literally not reviewed by the admissions committee.
Length of bus ride, aftercare complications/size of family/range of ages in family, history of your neighbors and/or social group's participating in CES/MS magnets in the past, probably help determin who bothers to test.
Anonymous
01/09/2019 09:36
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I thought this thread was about 4th grade?!?
Ok, here's a question. Now that universal screening was done for CES entrance, will this year's MS magnets draw more from the CESs than they did last year?
This year’s middle school magnet selection will still be drawn from students who were selected for CES via parent application. This year’s 4th graders were the first to be selected via universal screening in the TPMS/Eastern magnet area.
Ah, ok, thanks.
So next year...it seems that the CES schools will be graduating exactly the candidates that meet MCPS's new profile of who most deserves/needs the MS magnets. There will be some new arrivals to MCPS who won't have been tested yet, and some who turned down a CES offer but now want a MS magnet, and a few who somehow vastly out or underperform on the MS entrance criteria compared to what they presented at the CES level. Even so mostly one would expect the universal MS candidate process to mostly end up with the same candidates it had previously identifed as worthy of CES. Yes yes, some distortions due to application of the "cohort" scheme, but still. So relatively more of the "outliers" will come from CES pool next year than from the CES pool last and this year? It is hard to imagine being with an academic cohort in a CES for two years would do anything but make DC more of an outlier, right? So are we in a funny 2 year hiccup as the Metis report plan gets implemented?
That would be my guess, that there will be more kids from the CES pool getting in to the MS magnets.
I don't think that changes the debate over whether this new admissions process is better, or is ruining the magnets.
Remember that this year's 5th graders at the Drew and Fox Chapel CES programs were selected through universal screening (pilot program), so we may see some effects from that this year. But it may be hard to judge, since I'm unaware of previous data breaking down middle school admissions from each individual CES. On the other hand, there have always been more qualified/able children than available CES seats, so I would assume that there are still many highly able students not in a CES, even with universal screening.
Anonymous
01/09/2019 08:18
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I thought this thread was about 4th grade?!?
Ok, here's a question. Now that universal screening was done for CES entrance, will this year's MS magnets draw more from the CESs than they did last year?
This year’s middle school magnet selection will still be drawn from students who were selected for CES via parent application. This year’s 4th graders were the first to be selected via universal screening in the TPMS/Eastern magnet area.
Ah, ok, thanks.
So next year...it seems that the CES schools will be graduating exactly the candidates that meet MCPS's new profile of who most deserves/needs the MS magnets. There will be some new arrivals to MCPS who won't have been tested yet, and some who turned down a CES offer but now want a MS magnet, and a few who somehow vastly out or underperform on the MS entrance criteria compared to what they presented at the CES level. Even so mostly one would expect the universal MS candidate process to mostly end up with the same candidates it had previously identifed as worthy of CES. Yes yes, some distortions due to application of the "cohort" scheme, but still. So relatively more of the "outliers" will come from CES pool next year than from the CES pool last and this year? It is hard to imagine being with an academic cohort in a CES for two years would do anything but make DC more of an outlier, right? So are we in a funny 2 year hiccup as the Metis report plan gets implemented?
That would be my guess, that there will be more kids from the CES pool getting in to the MS magnets.
I don't think that changes the debate over whether this new admissions process is better, or is ruining the magnets.
Anonymous
01/09/2019 08:14
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No conspiracy. I do think there were parents who thought they had the system figured out. Their children were sufficiently prepped and then they successfully scored high enough on the different metrics that would have been competitive in years past. But not this year.
The students who were not invited just did not score high enough because of the change.
I think the parents of those students feel cheated, but the current system is more fair in my opinion. Others have stated why over and over, so I won’t rehash. But the parents who think it’s unfair won’t ever hear it. They’ll continue to think their child was more deserving and was cheated out of a superior education because they’re [insert reason].
You are NOT listening too. Past posts said highest scorers were not invited due to cohort. You just chose to think in your way.
Which school had no students admitted “due to cohort”?
You need to ask MCPS. Another related question is that when every middle school has cohort enrichment class, why do they need to use peer cohort as a criteria?
Because there are kids in each school who are above their cohort. Those were the kids selected.
How is above defined and measured? How can a kid stand out when the school have a group of top scorers?
I think there are two scenarios. At some schools there may be clear standout students. The Cogat scores, which parents did not get but the school district definitely has, could be 99th percentile at 135 or 99th percentile at 155. In this case if both students had perfect grades and perfect scores in other admissions criteria you would take the 155 child. Given how rare that 155 kid is in the general population it's unlikely there were standouts at EVERY school. In some schools there may well have been a cluster of 20 nearly equal kids at the top. FARMS could have made the difference in this case but unclear what they did at schools where there are few FARMS students. Anecdotally, it seems pretty random.
In looking at DD's class there are a half dozen clear outliers based on information the kids share with each other about test performance. The rest are kind of clustered in the same 97th-99th percentile area similar to many kids at the home school taking the enriched classes in MS.
Anonymous
01/09/2019 08:06
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No conspiracy. I do think there were parents who thought they had the system figured out. Their children were sufficiently prepped and then they successfully scored high enough on the different metrics that would have been competitive in years past. But not this year.
The students who were not invited just did not score high enough because of the change.
I think the parents of those students feel cheated, but the current system is more fair in my opinion. Others have stated why over and over, so I won’t rehash. But the parents who think it’s unfair won’t ever hear it. They’ll continue to think their child was more deserving and was cheated out of a superior education because they’re [insert reason].
You are NOT listening too. Past posts said highest scorers were not invited due to cohort. You just chose to think in your way.
+1
In the past them main way MCPS ranked candidates was globally. Every applicant was looked at against every applicant.
Because of the peer cohort criteria kids are essentially competing with other kids at their own school.
So if Larla goes to Cold Spring and has straight As, 99th percentile Cogat, 99th percentile MAP but they have 5 other kids with all As, 99.9th percentile Cogat, 99th percentile MAP and 7 others just like her at "only" 99th percentile Cogat she will likely not get in. Either to the CES or MS Magnet.
If Larlo goes to a low performing school has As and Bs, 95th percentile Cogat, 90th percentile MAP and is the top scorer in his grade and everyone else in the 80s for MAP he would get in under the new admissions process.
Is this more fair? I can see both sides but PPs who keep insisting that many parents are upset because their kids just didn't score "high enough" need to better understand what happened before they open their mouths. It's simply not true.
Anonymous
01/09/2019 01:28
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No conspiracy. I do think there were parents who thought they had the system figured out. Their children were sufficiently prepped and then they successfully scored high enough on the different metrics that would have been competitive in years past. But not this year.
The students who were not invited just did not score high enough because of the change.
I think the parents of those students feel cheated, but the current system is more fair in my opinion. Others have stated why over and over, so I won’t rehash. But the parents who think it’s unfair won’t ever hear it. They’ll continue to think their child was more deserving and was cheated out of a superior education because they’re [insert reason].
You are NOT listening too. Past posts said highest scorers were not invited due to cohort. You just chose to think in your way.
Which school had no students admitted “due to cohort”?
You need to ask MCPS. Another related question is that when every middle school has cohort enrichment class, why do they need to use peer cohort as a criteria?
Because there are kids in each school who are above their cohort. Those were the kids selected.
How is above defined and measured? How can a kid stand out when the school have a group of top scorers?
Anonymous
01/08/2019 22:45
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I thought this thread was about 4th grade?!?
Ok, here's a question. Now that universal screening was done for CES entrance, will this year's MS magnets draw more from the CESs than they did last year?
This year’s middle school magnet selection will still be drawn from students who were selected for CES via parent application. This year’s 4th graders were the first to be selected via universal screening in the TPMS/Eastern magnet area.
Ah, ok, thanks.
So next year...it seems that the CES schools will be graduating exactly the candidates that meet MCPS's new profile of who most deserves/needs the MS magnets. There will be some new arrivals to MCPS who won't have been tested yet, and some who turned down a CES offer but now want a MS magnet, and a few who somehow vastly out or underperform on the MS entrance criteria compared to what they presented at the CES level. Even so mostly one would expect the universal MS candidate process to mostly end up with the same candidates it had previously identifed as worthy of CES. Yes yes, some distortions due to application of the "cohort" scheme, but still. So relatively more of the "outliers" will come from CES pool next year than from the CES pool last and this year? It is hard to imagine being with an academic cohort in a CES for two years would do anything but make DC more of an outlier, right? So are we in a funny 2 year hiccup as the Metis report plan gets implemented?
Anonymous
01/08/2019 21:04
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I thought this thread was about 4th grade?!?
Ok, here's a question. Now that universal screening was done for CES entrance, will this year's MS magnets draw more from the CESs than they did last year?
This year’s middle school magnet selection will still be drawn from students who were selected for CES via parent application. This year’s 4th graders were the first to be selected via universal screening in the TPMS/Eastern magnet area.
Anonymous
01/08/2019 20:01
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No conspiracy. I do think there were parents who thought they had the system figured out. Their children were sufficiently prepped and then they successfully scored high enough on the different metrics that would have been competitive in years past. But not this year.
The students who were not invited just did not score high enough because of the change.
I think the parents of those students feel cheated, but the current system is more fair in my opinion. Others have stated why over and over, so I won’t rehash. But the parents who think it’s unfair won’t ever hear it. They’ll continue to think their child was more deserving and was cheated out of a superior education because they’re [insert reason].
You are NOT listening too. Past posts said highest scorers were not invited due to cohort. You just chose to think in your way.
Which school had no students admitted “due to cohort”?
You need to ask MCPS. Another related question is that when every middle school has cohort enrichment class, why do they need to use peer cohort as a criteria?
Because there are kids in each school who are above their cohort. Those were the kids selected.
Anonymous
01/08/2019 19:56
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No conspiracy. I do think there were parents who thought they had the system figured out. Their children were sufficiently prepped and then they successfully scored high enough on the different metrics that would have been competitive in years past. But not this year.
The students who were not invited just did not score high enough because of the change.
I think the parents of those students feel cheated, but the current system is more fair in my opinion. Others have stated why over and over, so I won’t rehash. But the parents who think it’s unfair won’t ever hear it. They’ll continue to think their child was more deserving and was cheated out of a superior education because they’re [insert reason].
You are NOT listening too. Past posts said highest scorers were not invited due to cohort. You just chose to think in your way.
Which school had no students admitted “due to cohort”?
You need to ask MCPS. Another related question is that when every middle school has cohort enrichment class, why do they need to use peer cohort as a criteria?
Anonymous
01/08/2019 19:56
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:I thought this thread was about 4th grade?!?
Ok, here's a question. Now that universal screening was done for CES entrance, will this year's MS magnets draw more from the CESs than they did last year?
Anonymous
01/08/2019 19:44
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No conspiracy. I do think there were parents who thought they had the system figured out. Their children were sufficiently prepped and then they successfully scored high enough on the different metrics that would have been competitive in years past. But not this year.
The students who were not invited just did not score high enough because of the change.
I think the parents of those students feel cheated, but the current system is more fair in my opinion. Others have stated why over and over, so I won’t rehash. But the parents who think it’s unfair won’t ever hear it. They’ll continue to think their child was more deserving and was cheated out of a superior education because they’re [insert reason].
You are NOT listening too. Past posts said highest scorers were not invited due to cohort. You just chose to think in your way.
Which school had no students admitted “due to cohort”?
Anonymous
01/08/2019 19:40
Subject: 4th Grade CES Admission Criteria?
Anonymous wrote:No conspiracy. I do think there were parents who thought they had the system figured out. Their children were sufficiently prepped and then they successfully scored high enough on the different metrics that would have been competitive in years past. But not this year.
The students who were not invited just did not score high enough because of the change.
I think the parents of those students feel cheated, but the current system is more fair in my opinion. Others have stated why over and over, so I won’t rehash. But the parents who think it’s unfair won’t ever hear it. They’ll continue to think their child was more deserving and was cheated out of a superior education because they’re [insert reason].
You are NOT listening too. Past posts said highest scorers were not invited due to cohort. You just chose to think in your way.