Anonymous wrote:

NP here. I guess when advice is offered, people are free to do what they want to do with that advice. The widening achievement gap only concerns the administration not the parents of students who are doing well and are on top of the achievement pyramid. What MCPS is doing in terms of their social engineering experiments is actually hurting the magnet programs because they are removing academic merit from the equation. Magnet students are spurred to stretch their abilities because of their peer group, they learn from each other. What are they learning from each other when one person gets in because of their merit and another because of skin color?

How, specifically, is MCPS doing this?

MCPS is not allowed to use skin color as a factor in admissions. It's illegal -- indeed unconstitutional -- for MCPS to do this. If you have evidence that MCPS is doing this, then you should stop wasting your time on DCUM. Go and report it directly to the US Department of Justice.

Anonymous wrote:

That may be true. However, the decline in results of magnet students is because of bringing in lower performing students in the mix to make MCPS look good. I am sure if you look at individual scores of high performing magnet students who are not-URM they have remained steady or even improved. That is why the achievement gap among the races continue to grow. MCPS cannot take the place of involved parents. That's an edge that these high performing students have for now.

Please cite two ways that MCPS has "brought in lower performing students into the mix" of the application magnet programs, in the past 10 years. Thanks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been saying all along that this is the beginning of the end. Have you noticed NMSF drop this year? No, 33 is not bad but even just a few years ago, IB produced equal or more than Blair SMAC. This year IB is outnumbered by a dozen or so. That's a one sign but a significant one.

It's amazing how the dismissal of Jennifer Hoover in the spring of 2017 affected the scores on tests taken in the fall of 2016 by students selected for the program in the spring of 2014.

No, it's not as cut and dry like that. Even when my kid was there - class of 2015 - the message from principal was loud and clear. He does not support IB and tried to mix IB with non-IB kids. It's a slow decline but if you have younger kids, something you should keep an eye on. My money is on continuing decline of IB stats - SAT scores, NMSF, IB test scores and such.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that test scores in MCPS as a whole has been declining, not just those in the RMIB program.

That may be true. However, the decline in results of magnet students is because of bringing in lower performing students in the mix to make MCPS look good. I am sure if you look at individual scores of high performing magnet students who are not-URM they have remained steady or even improved. That is why the achievement gap among the races continue to grow. MCPS cannot take the place of involved parents. That's an edge that these high performing students have for now.

Hasn't it been this way for YEARS at RM - set aside seats for cluster students? I don't think this is new for 2017, is it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No, it's not as cut and dry like that. Even when my kid was there - class of 2015 - the message from principal was loud and clear. He does not support IB and tried to mix IB with non-IB kids. It's a slow decline but if you have younger kids, something you should keep an eye on. My money is on continuing decline of IB stats - SAT scores, NMSF, IB test scores and such.

I have a younger kid. Thanks for your concern, but when it's time for her to think about applying to RMIB, I'm not going to be getting my information from two-year-old sky-is-falling threads on DCUM.

You are free to do whatever. No one really cares about your kid other than you.

Then why are you offering advice?

NP here. I guess when advice is offered, people are free to do what they want to do with that advice. The widening achievement gap only concerns the administration not the parents of students who are doing well and are on top of the achievement pyramid. What MCPS is doing in terms of their social engineering experiments is actually hurting the magnet programs because they are removing academic merit from the equation. Magnet students are spurred to stretch their abilities because of their peer group, they learn from each other. What are they learning from each other when one person gets in because of their merit and another because of skin color?

Anonymous wrote:

That may be true. However, the decline in results of magnet students is because of bringing in lower performing students in the mix to make MCPS look good. I am sure if you look at individual scores of high performing magnet students who are not-URM they have remained steady or even improved. That is why the achievement gap among the races continue to grow. MCPS cannot take the place of involved parents. That's an edge that these high performing students have for now.

I notice that you equated "URM students" and "uninvolved parents".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been saying all along that this is the beginning of the end. Have you noticed NMSF drop this year? No, 33 is not bad but even just a few years ago, IB produced equal or more than Blair SMAC. This year IB is outnumbered by a dozen or so. That's a one sign but a significant one.

It's amazing how the dismissal of Jennifer Hoover in the spring of 2017 affected the scores on tests taken in the fall of 2016 by students selected for the program in the spring of 2014.

No, it's not as cut and dry like that. Even when my kid was there - class of 2015 - the message from principal was loud and clear. He does not support IB and tried to mix IB with non-IB kids. It's a slow decline but if you have younger kids, something you should keep an eye on. My money is on continuing decline of IB stats - SAT scores, NMSF, IB test scores and such.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that test scores in MCPS as a whole has been declining, not just those in the RMIB program.

That may be true. However, the decline in results of magnet students is because of bringing in lower performing students in the mix to make MCPS look good. I am sure if you look at individual scores of high performing magnet students who are not-URM they have remained steady or even improved. That is why the achievement gap among the races continue to grow. MCPS cannot take the place of involved parents. That's an edge that these high performing students have for now.

? And how do you explain the decline in the W schools?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been saying all along that this is the beginning of the end. Have you noticed NMSF drop this year? No, 33 is not bad but even just a few years ago, IB produced equal or more than Blair SMAC. This year IB is outnumbered by a dozen or so. That's a one sign but a significant one.

It's amazing how the dismissal of Jennifer Hoover in the spring of 2017 affected the scores on tests taken in the fall of 2016 by students selected for the program in the spring of 2014.

No, it's not as cut and dry like that. Even when my kid was there - class of 2015 - the message from principal was loud and clear. He does not support IB and tried to mix IB with non-IB kids. It's a slow decline but if you have younger kids, something you should keep an eye on. My money is on continuing decline of IB stats - SAT scores, NMSF, IB test scores and such.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that test scores in MCPS as a whole has been declining, not just those in the RMIB program.

That may be true. However, the decline in results of magnet students is because of bringing in lower performing students in the mix to make MCPS look good. I am sure if you look at individual scores of high performing magnet students who are not-URM they have remained steady or even improved. That is why the achievement gap among the races continue to grow. MCPS cannot take the place of involved parents. That's an edge that these high performing students have for now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No, it's not as cut and dry like that. Even when my kid was there - class of 2015 - the message from principal was loud and clear. He does not support IB and tried to mix IB with non-IB kids. It's a slow decline but if you have younger kids, something you should keep an eye on. My money is on continuing decline of IB stats - SAT scores, NMSF, IB test scores and such.

I have a younger kid. Thanks for your concern, but when it's time for her to think about applying to RMIB, I'm not going to be getting my information from two-year-old sky-is-falling threads on DCUM.

You are free to do whatever. No one really cares about your kid other than you.

Then why are you offering advice?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been saying all along that this is the beginning of the end. Have you noticed NMSF drop this year? No, 33 is not bad but even just a few years ago, IB produced equal or more than Blair SMAC. This year IB is outnumbered by a dozen or so. That's a one sign but a significant one.

It's amazing how the dismissal of Jennifer Hoover in the spring of 2017 affected the scores on tests taken in the fall of 2016 by students selected for the program in the spring of 2014.

No, it's not as cut and dry like that. Even when my kid was there - class of 2015 - the message from principal was loud and clear. He does not support IB and tried to mix IB with non-IB kids. It's a slow decline but if you have younger kids, something you should keep an eye on. My money is on continuing decline of IB stats - SAT scores, NMSF, IB test scores and such.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that test scores in MCPS as a whole has been declining, not just those in the RMIB program.

2017: 153 NMSFs (from 13 schools; Blair 46, RM 33, Poolesivlle 16)
2016: 145 NMSFs (from 14 schools; Blair 41, RM 35, Wootton 15)
2015: 135 NMSFs (from 14 schools; Blair 41, RM 41, Poolesville 13)
2014: 133 NMSFs (from 13 schools; RM 34; Blair 32; Wootton 21)
2013: 163 NMSFs (from 14 schools; RM 42: Blair 36; Whitman 21)
2012: 137 NMSFs (from 12 schools; Blair 37; RM 26; Whitman 25)
2011: 170 NMSFs (from 14 schools; Blair 44; RM 39; Whitman 20)
2010: 157 NMSFs (from 16 schools; Blair 40; RM 30; Whitman 24)
2009: 149 NMSFs (from 15 schools; Blair 53; RM 28; Wootton 19)
2008: (I didn't find the press release on the web page)
2007: 124 NMSFs (from 14 schools; Blair 43; RM 26; Wootton 13)

I don't feel like spending more time on this, but other people are welcome to.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/press/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No, it's not as cut and dry like that. Even when my kid was there - class of 2015 - the message from principal was loud and clear. He does not support IB and tried to mix IB with non-IB kids. It's a slow decline but if you have younger kids, something you should keep an eye on. My money is on continuing decline of IB stats - SAT scores, NMSF, IB test scores and such.

I have a younger kid. Thanks for your concern, but when it's time for her to think about applying to RMIB, I'm not going to be getting my information from two-year-old sky-is-falling threads on DCUM.

You are free to do whatever. No one really cares about your kid other than you.

DP... isn't that pretty much all parents, like OP?

Anonymous wrote:Magnet programs take up host school resources. Allowing home school kids easier entry into magnet programs (ex, tpms, rmib) seems reasonable compensation.

Actually they don't. They are funded from a different bucket altogether by MCPS.

Magnet programs do the following -
-> Bring the academic scores of the school up
-> Lower the discipline issues in the school
-> Bring parents who have more resources to the school (usually you see the changes when parents start/fund programs, volunteer to chaperone field-trips, donate to school causes, start clubs, seek out outside opportunities for the students) and are more engaged. RM parents started an IB Foundation a few years ago that benefits all students doing the diploma program not just RMIB magnet students
-> Provide opportunities to other high-achieving non-magnet students within the school to be in a class with high performing peers and also to avail of opportunities that are opened up because of the magnet population - teams, clubs, volunteer opportunities, outreach, academic preparation
-> Becomes attractive to teachers who want to teach these students. Once these teachers are in the school they also take on other roles - club sponsors, team leads etc.
-> Make the area attractive to prospective home-buyers and lead to revitalization of that community.

What it does not do -
-> Increase the academic abilities of low and medium performing students. Magnet classrooms do not create the phenomenon where by mixing magnet students with non-magnet students will result in some sort of osmosis of abilities from high performing students to low performing students. Regardless of what MCPS is daydreaming. Not. Gonna. Happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No, it's not as cut and dry like that. Even when my kid was there - class of 2015 - the message from principal was loud and clear. He does not support IB and tried to mix IB with non-IB kids. It's a slow decline but if you have younger kids, something you should keep an eye on. My money is on continuing decline of IB stats - SAT scores, NMSF, IB test scores and such.

I have a younger kid. Thanks for your concern, but when it's time for her to think about applying to RMIB, I'm not going to be getting my information from two-year-old sky-is-falling threads on DCUM.

You are free to do whatever. No one really cares about your kid other than you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been saying all along that this is the beginning of the end. Have you noticed NMSF drop this year? No, 33 is not bad but even just a few years ago, IB produced equal or more than Blair SMAC. This year IB is outnumbered by a dozen or so. That's a one sign but a significant one.

It's amazing how the dismissal of Jennifer Hoover in the spring of 2017 affected the scores on tests taken in the fall of 2016 by students selected for the program in the spring of 2014.

No, it's not as cut and dry like that. Even when my kid was there - class of 2015 - the message from principal was loud and clear. He does not support IB and tried to mix IB with non-IB kids. It's a slow decline but if you have younger kids, something you should keep an eye on. My money is on continuing decline of IB stats - SAT scores, NMSF, IB test scores and such.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that test scores in MCPS as a whole has been declining, not just those in the RMIB program.

Blair SMAC is a good benchmark for IB. Go check historical NMSF data, IB and SMAC programs are always very close. Some years IB had more, some SMAC had more. I think those days are gone. I am looking forward to IB's SAT avg score to come out. I'll be very surprised if they can maintain 2250 score. I highly doubt it.

Anonymous wrote:

No, it's not as cut and dry like that. Even when my kid was there - class of 2015 - the message from principal was loud and clear. He does not support IB and tried to mix IB with non-IB kids. It's a slow decline but if you have younger kids, something you should keep an eye on. My money is on continuing decline of IB stats - SAT scores, NMSF, IB test scores and such.

I have a younger kid. Thanks for your concern, but when it's time for her to think about applying to RMIB, I'm not going to be getting my information from two-year-old sky-is-falling threads on DCUM.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been saying all along that this is the beginning of the end. Have you noticed NMSF drop this year? No, 33 is not bad but even just a few years ago, IB produced equal or more than Blair SMAC. This year IB is outnumbered by a dozen or so. That's a one sign but a significant one.

It's amazing how the dismissal of Jennifer Hoover in the spring of 2017 affected the scores on tests taken in the fall of 2016 by students selected for the program in the spring of 2014.

No, it's not as cut and dry like that. Even when my kid was there - class of 2015 - the message from principal was loud and clear. He does not support IB and tried to mix IB with non-IB kids. It's a slow decline but if you have younger kids, something you should keep an eye on. My money is on continuing decline of IB stats - SAT scores, NMSF, IB test scores and such.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that test scores in MCPS as a whole has been declining, not just those in the RMIB program.