Anonymous
09/15/2025 21:55
Subject: TJ - 100+ NMSFs
Anonymous wrote:These tests measure a thing. A century of research tells us that the thing it measures is not some niche "test taking" skill.Anonymous wrote:It's great that TJ has more semifinalists, but realistically it's just another measure that only takes test-taking skills into account. When you stop overselecting for test-taking skills in an admissions process, any other metric that relies entirely on test-taking skills is going to decline as well.
That only really means anything of significance if you're one of these retrograde thinkers who believes that standardized tests are the end-all-be-all of determining "merit" because "everyone has the same opportunity" when they don't.
It measures the same thing in poor/rich, black white, male/female.
There is at least as much science (in terms of research) behind this than there is behind the big bang or global warming.
There's literally thousands of replicable studies on this.
If you want to lie to yourself so you can sleep at night, that's fine. But we shouldn't base policy on those lies.
+1 Find us a better metric to judge performance of students and let us know. It certainly isn't personal statement essays written by college consultants earning big $$$.
Anonymous
09/15/2025 21:48
Subject: TJ - 100+ NMSFs
These tests measure a thing. A century of research tells us that the thing it measures is not some niche "test taking" skill.Anonymous wrote:It's great that TJ has more semifinalists, but realistically it's just another measure that only takes test-taking skills into account. When you stop overselecting for test-taking skills in an admissions process, any other metric that relies entirely on test-taking skills is going to decline as well.
That only really means anything of significance if you're one of these retrograde thinkers who believes that standardized tests are the end-all-be-all of determining "merit" because "everyone has the same opportunity" when they don't.
It measures the same thing in poor/rich, black white, male/female.
There is at least as much science (in terms of research) behind this than there is behind the big bang or global warming.
There's literally thousands of replicable studies on this.
If you want to lie to yourself so you can sleep at night, that's fine. But we shouldn't base policy on those lies.
Anonymous
09/15/2025 18:47
Subject: TJ - 100+ NMSFs
It's great that TJ has more semifinalists, but realistically it's just another measure that only takes test-taking skills into account. When you stop overselecting for test-taking skills in an admissions process, any other metric that relies entirely on test-taking skills is going to decline as well.
That only really means anything of significance if you're one of these retrograde thinkers who believes that standardized tests are the end-all-be-all of determining "merit" because "everyone has the same opportunity" when they don't.
That only really means anything of significance if you're one of these retrograde thinkers who believes that standardized tests are the end-all-be-all of determining "merit" because "everyone has the same opportunity" when they don't.
Anonymous
09/15/2025 11:18
Subject: TJ - 100+ NMSFs
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:For vast majority of the years prior to 2025, 1/3 of the class got NMSF.
For 2025 it was 16% or 1/6th of the class. So it was half the rate as prior years.
That’s much lower than Blair and RMIB rates. About 1/3 got it from each program.
LOL
It is small and a key component of admissions is the MAP test which is similar to SAT. So the students are already being filtered by choosing those who are going to do well on SAT. I am surprised it is not 80%.
MAP not used for HS magnets. Get it right.
MAP absolutely is used for MCPS Blair and RMIB.
But it's not a strict top 1% so there's no reason to expect nearly everyone would be NMSF.
That's only because MCPS is stupid about how it selects kids for magnets. They even have COGAT info and don't use it, and just use MAP-M OR MAP-R depending on the magnet--not even both of them!
Anonymous
09/14/2025 21:10
Subject: TJ - 100+ NMSFs
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:For vast majority of the years prior to 2025, 1/3 of the class got NMSF.
For 2025 it was 16% or 1/6th of the class. So it was half the rate as prior years.
That’s much lower than Blair and RMIB rates. About 1/3 got it from each program.
LOL
It is small and a key component of admissions is the MAP test which is similar to SAT. So the students are already being filtered by choosing those who are going to do well on SAT. I am surprised it is not 80%.
MAP not used for HS magnets. Get it right.
MAP absolutely is used for MCPS Blair and RMIB.
But it's not a strict top 1% so there's no reason to expect nearly everyone would be NMSF.
What is MAP ?
Anonymous
09/14/2025 18:51
Subject: TJ - 100+ NMSFs
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:For vast majority of the years prior to 2025, 1/3 of the class got NMSF.
For 2025 it was 16% or 1/6th of the class. So it was half the rate as prior years.
That’s much lower than Blair and RMIB rates. About 1/3 got it from each program.
LOL
It is small and a key component of admissions is the MAP test which is similar to SAT. So the students are already being filtered by choosing those who are going to do well on SAT. I am surprised it is not 80%.
MAP not used for HS magnets. Get it right.
MAP absolutely is used for MCPS Blair and RMIB.
But it's not a strict top 1% so there's no reason to expect nearly everyone would be NMSF.