Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About time. Age norm the MAP scores while you are at it.

MAP scores have always been age-normed.
This is why from a point of view of testing, red-shirted kids don't necessarily have an academic advantage.

No MAP is not age-normed. Not for MCPS anyway. If you look at the cogat test reports it shows the percentile of your child considering the scores for children of X number of years and months. For MAP testing, it just shows your child as benchmarked against the district and grade level means.

+1 This annoyed me. My kid is one of the youngest in their class, and CES slots are assigned solely based on MAP scores, and not COGAT scores which control for age.

They are not assigned based on MAP scores. It’s not like those who score well have an especially good chance of getting in. They throw anyone in the 85th oercentile (locally normed) into a lottery.

It’s not a good system, and it would be improved by using CogAt, but the real problem is that the lottery threshold is too low.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About time. Age norm the MAP scores while you are at it.

MAP scores have always been age-normed.
This is why from a point of view of testing, red-shirted kids don't necessarily have an academic advantage.

No MAP is not age-normed. Not for MCPS anyway. If you look at the cogat test reports it shows the percentile of your child considering the scores for children of X number of years and months. For MAP testing, it just shows your child as benchmarked against the district and grade level means.

+1 This annoyed me. My kid is one of the youngest in their class, and CES slots are assigned solely based on MAP scores, and not COGAT scores which control for age.

Anonymous wrote:DC was definitely not ready for K at first access and might have been an issue in the classroom. Redshirting alleviated that ahead of time and guaranteed a better K year for everyone, including the other kids and their families. DC went on to be very successful and hasn't taken any advantages (or attention, or sports positions) away from anyone else.

You sound both privileged and oblivious. You were not in the classroom at all times or in any position to know what resources your child took up or took away from others. And the fact that he was "very successful" could be due to the fact that he was a year older than many other kids in his class who went through their schooling following the prescribed norms for entrance year.

DC was definitely not ready for K at first access and might have been an issue in the classroom. Redshirting alleviated that ahead of time and guaranteed a better K year for everyone, including the other kids and their families. DC went on to be very successful and hasn't taken any advantages (or attention, or sports positions) away from anyone else.

Anonymous wrote:I would fully support this. As a teacher it is common to see well off, usually white kids redshirted while low income usually not white kids are sent on time. It just makes the achievement gap worse.

+1. One family I knew literally had their kid induced on August 30 so they wouldn’t have to pay for an extra year of daycare. Redshirting may be valid in some cases but it’s nearly always something privileged parents do.

Anonymous wrote:Enrollment is falling so they need to get these kids enrolled as quickly as possible because some funding is based on overall enrollment. Banning redshirting would briefly slow the decline so it would make sense as a stop-gap to preserve funding.

Eh those are the kids most likely to opt for private instead

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About time. Age norm the MAP scores while you are at it.

MAP scores have always been age-normed.
This is why from a point of view of testing, red-shirted kids don't necessarily have an academic advantage.

No MAP is not age-normed. Not for MCPS anyway. If you look at the cogat test reports it shows the percentile of your child considering the scores for children of X number of years and months. For MAP testing, it just shows your child as benchmarked against the district and grade level means.

I would fully support this. As a teacher it is common to see well off, usually white kids redshirted while low income usually not white kids are sent on time. It just makes the achievement gap worse.

Anonymous wrote:About time. Age norm the MAP scores while you are at it.

MAP scores have always been age-normed.
This is why from a point of view of testing, red-shirted kids don't necessarily have an academic advantage.

About time. Age norm the MAP scores while you are at it.

OP,

My micropreemie with autism/ADHD/dysgraphia/dyscalculia and a speech disorder repeated K: one year in a preschool Kindergarten, and one year in MCPS Kindergarten. He got so academically bored that he skipped first grade and landed back with same-aged peers. He graduated high school with a dozen AP courses.

It's hard to know how to manage children with a wide range of deficits but also talents. My son is twice exceptional and we prioritized his academic wellbeing above any potential social benefit (that didn't seem to materialize anyway, since he's a classic autistic person).

So just know that what you decide now doesn't need to define his entire trajectory. He can still change course later, in some way.
It might be hard to persuade schools of this, but the Principal at Bethesda Elementary allowed it.

Anonymous wrote:I still think in a populous county such as MCPS they should matriculate the kids by semester. That way you don't have the redshiterd problem.

That would mess up high school sports which, whether you want to accept it or not, is a pretty big deal.

I still think in a populous county such as MCPS they should matriculate the kids by semester. That way you don't have the redshiterd problem.

Back in the early 90s, I did not turn 5 until mid October of my Kindergarten year. There were tons of kids in that boat.

Do we think MCPS is going to deploy the truant officers to go after the parents of young 5 year olds?