Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have a child with a high score that was also waitlisted and we are not Asian. I think he was waitlisted because he scored highly advanced for math (MAP-M/grades) but only 1 year advanced for reading/literacy. His friend got in who is at least 2 years advanced in reading with a similar score. Because we don't know the breakdown of the scores I can't say if my theory is correct, but it makes sense if you consider that the HGC program is primarily a humanities program.

I kind of agree with this.

Yes. A related point having to do with sub-section scores--my understanding is that the breakdown between the three sections is important. Conventional wisdom is that you need to score very high (like 150s) on 2 sections, and at median (at worst) on the third to get in. Given how much writing and research is involved, does make sense to have some degree of emphasis on the reading score.

This is not just conventional wisdom, if what you mean by that is educated speculation. There are state BOE opinions describing exactly that -- that three subscores at the median are not weighted nearly the same as a very high subscore on one part, or two parts, and even a below median score on other parts. But were subscores given this year?

Now I see the point of giving only one score. People cannot know or prove their kids are doing very well in subsections and cannot advocate for their kids.

You can always refer to the Map-R score, and reading level, and Grade 2 reports to be able to tell your kids performance. These scores are all available at school upon request. Some schools send them to home.

Map-r is a good indicator. Will reading levels and report card be able to differentiate those who get in and who are waitlisted?

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

I have a child with a high score that was also waitlisted and we are not Asian. I think he was waitlisted because he scored highly advanced for math (MAP-M/grades) but only 1 year advanced for reading/literacy. His friend got in who is at least 2 years advanced in reading with a similar score. Because we don't know the breakdown of the scores I can't say if my theory is correct, but it makes sense if you consider that the HGC program is primarily a humanities program.[/quote]

I kind of agree with this.
[/quote]


Yes. A related point having to do with sub-section scores--my understanding is that the breakdown between the three sections is important. Conventional wisdom is that you need to score very high (like 150s) on 2 sections, and at median (at worst) on the third to get in. Given how much writing and research is involved, does make sense to have some degree of emphasis on the reading score. [/quote]

That cannot be the conventional wisdom. The median of the admitted students means half of the admitted students scored lower than median. Plus I have not seen any center with median in 150. [/quote]



Just one example. Last year my DC scored mid 150s on the verbal and quantitative, but barely at median, mid-130s, on non-verbal. Her overall SAS score was in the 140s (147 I believe), but the two very high sub-section scores likely led to her acceptance.

[/quote]

One example, very possible. However, it cannot be generally true from a mathematical point of view.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have a child with a high score that was also waitlisted and we are not Asian. I think he was waitlisted because he scored highly advanced for math (MAP-M/grades) but only 1 year advanced for reading/literacy. His friend got in who is at least 2 years advanced in reading with a similar score. Because we don't know the breakdown of the scores I can't say if my theory is correct, but it makes sense if you consider that the HGC program is primarily a humanities program.

I kind of agree with this.

Yes. A related point having to do with sub-section scores--my understanding is that the breakdown between the three sections is important. Conventional wisdom is that you need to score very high (like 150s) on 2 sections, and at median (at worst) on the third to get in. Given how much writing and research is involved, does make sense to have some degree of emphasis on the reading score.

This is not just conventional wisdom, if what you mean by that is educated speculation. There are state BOE opinions describing exactly that -- that three subscores at the median are not weighted nearly the same as a very high subscore on one part, or two parts, and even a below median score on other parts. But were subscores given this year?

Now I see the point of giving only one score. People cannot know or prove their kids are doing very well in subsections and cannot advocate for their kids.

You can always refer to the Map-R score, and reading level, and Grade 2 reports to be able to tell your kids performance. These scores are all available at school upon request. Some schools send them to home.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

I have a child with a high score that was also waitlisted and we are not Asian. I think he was waitlisted because he scored highly advanced for math (MAP-M/grades) but only 1 year advanced for reading/literacy. His friend got in who is at least 2 years advanced in reading with a similar score. Because we don't know the breakdown of the scores I can't say if my theory is correct, but it makes sense if you consider that the HGC program is primarily a humanities program.[/quote]

I kind of agree with this.
[/quote]


Yes. A related point having to do with sub-section scores--my understanding is that the breakdown between the three sections is important. Conventional wisdom is that you need to score very high (like 150s) on 2 sections, and at median (at worst) on the third to get in. Given how much writing and research is involved, does make sense to have some degree of emphasis on the reading score. [/quote]

That cannot be the conventional wisdom. The median of the admitted students means half of the admitted students scored lower than median. Plus I have not seen any center with median in 150. [/quote]



Just one example. Last year my DC scored mid 150s on the verbal and quantitative, but barely at median, mid-130s, on non-verbal. Her overall SAS score was in the 140s (147 I believe), but the two very high sub-section scores likely led to her acceptance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have a child with a high score that was also waitlisted and we are not Asian. I think he was waitlisted because he scored highly advanced for math (MAP-M/grades) but only 1 year advanced for reading/literacy. His friend got in who is at least 2 years advanced in reading with a similar score. Because we don't know the breakdown of the scores I can't say if my theory is correct, but it makes sense if you consider that the HGC program is primarily a humanities program.

I kind of agree with this.

Yes. A related point having to do with sub-section scores--my understanding is that the breakdown between the three sections is important. Conventional wisdom is that you need to score very high (like 150s) on 2 sections, and at median (at worst) on the third to get in. Given how much writing and research is involved, does make sense to have some degree of emphasis on the reading score.

That cannot be the conventional wisdom. The median of the admitted students means half of the admitted students scored lower than median. Plus I have not seen any center with median in 150.

I am the PP who described the BOE opinion. I wasn't agreeing that 150 was the needed score, just the principle that the subscores matter. In prior years, when I think the test may have been harder judging from what people are saying on this thread, not that many admitted students scored 150 on any portion of the test. Also, the median that apparently was reported this year was not the median of the accepted applicants, but just the median of the pool of applicants (again, just judging from what people have said on this thread). In prior years, the report listed the median of the ADMITTED students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have a child with a high score that was also waitlisted and we are not Asian. I think he was waitlisted because he scored highly advanced for math (MAP-M/grades) but only 1 year advanced for reading/literacy. His friend got in who is at least 2 years advanced in reading with a similar score. Because we don't know the breakdown of the scores I can't say if my theory is correct, but it makes sense if you consider that the HGC program is primarily a humanities program.

I kind of agree with this.

Yes. A related point having to do with sub-section scores--my understanding is that the breakdown between the three sections is important. Conventional wisdom is that you need to score very high (like 150s) on 2 sections, and at median (at worst) on the third to get in. Given how much writing and research is involved, does make sense to have some degree of emphasis on the reading score.

This is not just conventional wisdom, if what you mean by that is educated speculation. There are state BOE opinions describing exactly that -- that three subscores at the median are not weighted nearly the same as a very high subscore on one part, or two parts, and even a below median score on other parts. But were subscores given this year?

Now I see the point of giving only one score. People cannot know or prove their kids are doing very well in subsections and cannot advocate for their kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have a child with a high score that was also waitlisted and we are not Asian. I think he was waitlisted because he scored highly advanced for math (MAP-M/grades) but only 1 year advanced for reading/literacy. His friend got in who is at least 2 years advanced in reading with a similar score. Because we don't know the breakdown of the scores I can't say if my theory is correct, but it makes sense if you consider that the HGC program is primarily a humanities program.

I kind of agree with this.

Yes. A related point having to do with sub-section scores--my understanding is that the breakdown between the three sections is important. Conventional wisdom is that you need to score very high (like 150s) on 2 sections, and at median (at worst) on the third to get in. Given how much writing and research is involved, does make sense to have some degree of emphasis on the reading score.

That cannot be the conventional wisdom. The median of the admitted students means half of the admitted students scored lower than median. Plus I have not seen any center with median in 150.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have a child with a high score that was also waitlisted and we are not Asian. I think he was waitlisted because he scored highly advanced for math (MAP-M/grades) but only 1 year advanced for reading/literacy. His friend got in who is at least 2 years advanced in reading with a similar score. Because we don't know the breakdown of the scores I can't say if my theory is correct, but it makes sense if you consider that the HGC program is primarily a humanities program.

I kind of agree with this.

Yes. A related point having to do with sub-section scores--my understanding is that the breakdown between the three sections is important. Conventional wisdom is that you need to score very high (like 150s) on 2 sections, and at median (at worst) on the third to get in. Given how much writing and research is involved, does make sense to have some degree of emphasis on the reading score.

This is not just conventional wisdom, if what you mean by that is educated speculation. There are state BOE opinions describing exactly that -- that three subscores at the median are not weighted nearly the same as a very high subscore on one part, or two parts, and even a below median score on other parts. But were subscores given this year?

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, HGC are NOT about cramming. Kids have to learn on the fly and they have to participate in fast paced learning
and they have to produce very creative original work all the time. Write a lot at school, often pages and pages.
If you have a kid who can cram at home but can not keep up with the peers they will struggle and struggle big time.
You get few kids like that at the Gifted Elementary but they are rather quickly left behind and do not get into
the Middle because again, you need teacher's evaluation and recommendation. Which teacher will recommend
less then extremely gifted kids having scores to choose from if they know that kid will need to keep up. It is huge disfavor to the kid to let them in only for the kids to struggle big time.


As an HGC parent, I have read several descriptions of the program like this one, that are really overblown. The math is the same curriculum as home school. There are more creative assignments and writing projects, but it is not like the kids are going to college in 4th Grade. In my experience the classroom atmosphere is far more noisy with kids roaming everywhere than home school.

I agree. It is not cramming but it is working on longer term projects. Kids who put too much pressure on themselves or have poor executive function can get overwhelmed but the workload is not THAT much. Many of the kids maintain their outside hobbies and friendships, though a long commute can make this somewhat more challenging. I loved the program for my child and wished my other child got into it as well because the teachers were great, the school, including the HGC, was more diverse, and the parent community was welcoming and friendly and involved.

Remember it is a HUMANITIES program not a MATH program, so kids who excel at math won't necessarily be more challenged here than at their home school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have a child with a high score that was also waitlisted and we are not Asian. I think he was waitlisted because he scored highly advanced for math (MAP-M/grades) but only 1 year advanced for reading/literacy. His friend got in who is at least 2 years advanced in reading with a similar score. Because we don't know the breakdown of the scores I can't say if my theory is correct, but it makes sense if you consider that the HGC program is primarily a humanities program.

I kind of agree with this.

Yes. A related point having to do with sub-section scores--my understanding is that the breakdown between the three sections is important. Conventional wisdom is that you need to score very high (like 150s) on 2 sections, and at median (at worst) on the third to get in. Given how much writing and research is involved, does make sense to have some degree of emphasis on the reading score.

never mind. I read the letter wrong. 116 is the median.

I am confused. The letter says the median is 216. So how is a high score 147? Thanks!

Anonymous wrote:

I have a child with a high score that was also waitlisted and we are not Asian. I think he was waitlisted because he scored highly advanced for math (MAP-M/grades) but only 1 year advanced for reading/literacy. His friend got in who is at least 2 years advanced in reading with a similar score. Because we don't know the breakdown of the scores I can't say if my theory is correct, but it makes sense if you consider that the HGC program is primarily a humanities program.

I kind of agree with this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:...reading this thread...I am so happy my kid did not make it...most of you are psychos...really. What a failure of a system. I would suggest MoCo to get rid of this and stop feeding insane parents.

I am sure there are always a few crazies anywhere you go but I don't think your response sounds normal either. There are NORMAL parents with high achieving kids.

They are 8 for god sake. High achievers? Kids do not care. Is all the parents.
This educational system is broken and generating more and more fake geniuses.

No one said they are geniuses. I think some parents want access to an enriched curriculum because they are indeed higher academic achievers. If a kid is reading 3 grade level ahead, let them be enriched wherever they are, be it at the home school or elsewhere.

I do agree with your comment. I think this is the job of the local school. Otherwise the system is simply segregating, which is a big problem with all these special programs in public schools, that are not available to all. Equal opportunity, equal reach to all. Kids are kids...some may be unusually "gifted". I hope more and more school opt to adopt clever and fun ways to fulfill the "needs" to these very curious kids. I would level education up. But when you say that, the parents that think their kids are unique say "you have no idea what it means to have a gifted kid" (without knowing).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son was waitlisted at Barnsley with a score of 144.

Is he Asian?

No, he is not Asian (uncertain why that would even be relevant?). We are fine with the outcome, but would have liked to have some context as to why he was wait listed. Helpful to know so we can offer enrichment in lieu of this. Hopefully, Farmland ES is diligent in offering enrichment programming in 4th and 5th grade, and that they don't just go through the motions. Does anybody have insight regarding this?

Because MCPS made a big deal about the racial makeup of the magnet program is not comparable to the county population. They are trying to downgrade the importance of test scores so that they have more flexibility to make up the GT programs.

It is good to know that your child is not excluded purely because Asians were over-represented.

I have a child with a high score that was also waitlisted and we are not Asian. I think he was waitlisted because he scored highly advanced for math (MAP-M/grades) but only 1 year advanced for reading/literacy. His friend got in who is at least 2 years advanced in reading with a similar score. Because we don't know the breakdown of the scores I can't say if my theory is correct, but it makes sense if you consider that the HGC program is primarily a humanities program.