Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess the real question is why MCPS would report the applicant's percentile scores in which 99% covers ~130 - 160 raw scores when they have the raw score. It's unlikely an accident because it had always been the raw score that was reported in the old 3rd grade HGC test which also used Cogat. In the past, the medians of the accepted were also given in the decision letter. Now, it would be three 99%'s, and the accepted or rejected would never know where their standing is in the test. I understand MCPS is trying to tune down the importance of the test or any test, but without clearly listing any criteria that the decision was based upon, one can only guess it was something that can't be openly stated.

I don't have kids applying, but the way MCPS handles it's policy changing and decision making is very worrisome, and many changes such as the elementary grading system in recently years have been deemed failures and had to be rolled back the old way. I don't know if the changes to the magnet programs in the past couple of years will make the programs better? Maybe yes, more likely no. I feel MCPS is so desperate it would try anything randomly. Today it is the magnet programs which is irrelevant to most, tomorrow it might be something that will impact you.

If you want to know your kid's CogAt scores, you can get them.

MCPS most likely won't release the median of the accepted students this year, but if enough parents get the raw scores of their student and report it here voluntarily, everyone will have a better idea.

Anonymous wrote:

Another thread has a poster saying they called to ask and were told they weren't being released, however, it was unclear whether the poster was talking about high school or middle school. I would call, but I'm at work and don't have my kid's student ID number with me. Has anyone successfully gotten their kid's raw score?

Form here: http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/forms/pdf/550-2.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess the real question is why MCPS would report the applicant's percentile scores in which 99% covers ~130 - 160 raw scores when they have the raw score. It's unlikely an accident because it had always been the raw score that was reported in the old 3rd grade HGC test which also used Cogat. In the past, the medians of the accepted were also given in the decision letter. Now, it would be three 99%'s, and the accepted or rejected would never know where their standing is in the test. I understand MCPS is trying to tune down the importance of the test or any test, but without clearly listing any criteria that the decision was based upon, one can only guess it was something that can't be openly stated.

I don't have kids applying, but the way MCPS handles it's policy changing and decision making is very worrisome, and many changes such as the elementary grading system in recently years have been deemed failures and had to be rolled back the old way. I don't know if the changes to the magnet programs in the past couple of years will make the programs better? Maybe yes, more likely no. I feel MCPS is so desperate it would try anything randomly. Today it is the magnet programs which is irrelevant to most, tomorrow it might be something that will impact you.

If you want to know your kid's CogAt scores, you can get them.

Another thread has a poster saying they called to ask and were told they weren't being released, however, it was unclear whether the poster was talking about high school or middle school. I would call, but I'm at work and don't have my kid's student ID number with me. Has anyone successfully gotten their kid's raw score?

You can get your kid's scores for sure. Many parents don't know about this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess the real question is why MCPS would report the applicant's percentile scores in which 99% covers ~130 - 160 raw scores when they have the raw score. It's unlikely an accident because it had always been the raw score that was reported in the old 3rd grade HGC test which also used Cogat. In the past, the medians of the accepted were also given in the decision letter. Now, it would be three 99%'s, and the accepted or rejected would never know where their standing is in the test. I understand MCPS is trying to tune down the importance of the test or any test, but without clearly listing any criteria that the decision was based upon, one can only guess it was something that can't be openly stated.

I don't have kids applying, but the way MCPS handles it's policy changing and decision making is very worrisome, and many changes such as the elementary grading system in recently years have been deemed failures and had to be rolled back the old way. I don't know if the changes to the magnet programs in the past couple of years will make the programs better? Maybe yes, more likely no. I feel MCPS is so desperate it would try anything randomly. Today it is the magnet programs which is irrelevant to most, tomorrow it might be something that will impact you.

If you want to know your kid's CogAt scores, you can get them.

Another thread has a poster saying they called to ask and were told they weren't being released, however, it was unclear whether the poster was talking about high school or middle school. I would call, but I'm at work and don't have my kid's student ID number with me. Has anyone successfully gotten their kid's raw score?

Anonymous wrote:I guess the real question is why MCPS would report the applicant's percentile scores in which 99% covers ~130 - 160 raw scores when they have the raw score. It's unlikely an accident because it had always been the raw score that was reported in the old 3rd grade HGC test which also used Cogat. In the past, the medians of the accepted were also given in the decision letter. Now, it would be three 99%'s, and the accepted or rejected would never know where their standing is in the test. I understand MCPS is trying to tune down the importance of the test or any test, but without clearly listing any criteria that the decision was based upon, one can only guess it was something that can't be openly stated.

I don't have kids applying, but the way MCPS handles it's policy changing and decision making is very worrisome, and many changes such as the elementary grading system in recently years have been deemed failures and had to be rolled back the old way. I don't know if the changes to the magnet programs in the past couple of years will make the programs better? Maybe yes, more likely no. I feel MCPS is so desperate it would try anything randomly. Today it is the magnet programs which is irrelevant to most, tomorrow it might be something that will impact you.

If you want to know your kid's CogAt scores, you can get them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I find this "mid-west humility" hilariously pretentious. Especially, the final "teaching moment. Sorry, but it is. Great that your kid got in and did well. But, when 2 kids from CS get in and Oakview has "no"s across the board w/ 5 kids still waiting, that is beyond the realm of the bigger pool theory. There are clearly other factors at play. Will be interesting to see how next year at the magnets plays out.

You think it is? I don't think it is.

I'm not the Midwestern PP, although I am also a PP and also from the Midwest.

If this big pool theory holds and apply to TPMS class of 2021, we should be able to see huge improvement compared to class of 2020/2019. It is like the best from 4000 vs the best from 700/800.

MathCounts, Science Bowl --- anything else to watch ?

Agreed. This should elevate the best kids, rather than just smart kids with parents in the know.

My bigger question is one others are clearly worried about too -- MCPS has to make sure the smart kids who don't make the cut for magnet (for whatever reason) are still being challenged at school. I don't yet have a kid in MCPS, so I don't know, but is there tracking? When I was a kid, I remember we had tracked reading and math groups starting at a pretty young age (by 3rd grade for sure). Do they do that now?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I find this "mid-west humility" hilariously pretentious. Especially, the final "teaching moment. Sorry, but it is. Great that your kid got in and did well. But, when 2 kids from CS get in and Oakview has "no"s across the board w/ 5 kids still waiting, that is beyond the realm of the bigger pool theory. There are clearly other factors at play. Will be interesting to see how next year at the magnets plays out.

You think it is? I don't think it is.

I'm not the Midwestern PP, although I am also a PP and also from the Midwest.

If this big pool theory holds and apply to TPMS class of 2021, we should be able to see huge improvement compared to class of 2020/2019. It is like the best from 4000 vs the best from 700/800.

MathCounts, Science Bowl --- anything else to watch ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously we they screened the ENTIRE student popultion they found some really smart kids with parents who aren't obsessive about their kids' educations. I love that they removed the parent component! It means access for all, not just the savvy. I'm eager to see what it means for CES!

However, there is an obvious need to make sure the high achieving kids who didn't get into a special program are having their academic needs met, and, as I think we all know, that means clustering. This is good for kids and for teachers.

Agreed. People need to recognize that their white, UMC snowflake child isn't going to get a leg up just because they want snowflake to feel special 24/7. Equitable access to these programs is a *good* thing.

- a white UMC mom

The fact is, last year the universal screening had already been implemented, but kids from HGC got regular acceptance rates. You can search and find multiple threads here. The selection criteria changed dramatically only from this year (and onward).

I don't think so. Don't know about HGC but when our relative in a regular elementary school applied last year, there was no universal screening. FWIW, the child was rejected.

I guess the real question is why MCPS would report the applicant's percentile scores in which 99% covers ~130 - 160 raw scores when they have the raw score. It's unlikely an accident because it had always been the raw score that was reported in the old 3rd grade HGC test which also used Cogat. In the past, the medians of the accepted were also given in the decision letter. Now, it would be three 99%'s, and the accepted or rejected would never know where their standing is in the test. I understand MCPS is trying to tune down the importance of the test or any test, but without clearly listing any criteria that the decision was based upon, one can only guess it was something that can't be openly stated.

I don't have kids applying, but the way MCPS handles it's policy changing and decision making is very worrisome, and many changes such as the elementary grading system in recently years have been deemed failures and had to be rolled back the old way. I don't know if the changes to the magnet programs in the past couple of years will make the programs better? Maybe yes, more likely no. I feel MCPS is so desperate it would try anything randomly. Today it is the magnet programs which is irrelevant to most, tomorrow it might be something that will impact you.

Will this be expanded to Blair/RM/Poolsville high school magnet? After what they did to elementary and middle school, it's highly likely this may be implemented in high school next year or so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, MCPS changed from selecting 200 magnet students out of 800 self-selected applicants to picking 200 magnet students from a pool of 4000 county IDed kids and the DCUM penut gallery is surprised that the results of selection are very different? Hmm ...

If this was indeed all that happened I would say bravo MCPS for expanding the pool, for encouraging more families to apply etc. If this result is because a greater number of highly qualified candidates are applying I would be very happy

if they changed the selection criteria so a top performing kid is rejected only because he/she is zoned for a W school that is discrimination. If they are using geography as a proxy for race that is discrimination

In their selection criteria, it already said that cohorts are used. So yes, by your reasoning, they discriminated.

Sounds like the Ivy admissions; it's much easier to get in by being a valedictorian at Bumf--k High in Omaha than being one of the top 10 students at Whitman.

You know what - I hadn't heard this analogy before, but I think this is particularly apt. And those kids from Omaha were just as capable at succeeding at the Ivy League level. It's the lack of seats that is the problem, not the capabilities of those deemed worthy of admission.

Anonymous wrote:

The fact is, last year the universal screening had already been implemented, but kids from HGC got regular acceptance rates. You can search and find multiple threads here. The selection criteria changed dramatically only from this year (and onward).

Universal screening for the middle-school programs, last year? Really?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously we they screened the ENTIRE student popultion they found some really smart kids with parents who aren't obsessive about their kids' educations. I love that they removed the parent component! It means access for all, not just the savvy. I'm eager to see what it means for CES!

However, there is an obvious need to make sure the high achieving kids who didn't get into a special program are having their academic needs met, and, as I think we all know, that means clustering. This is good for kids and for teachers.

Agreed. People need to recognize that their white, UMC snowflake child isn't going to get a leg up just because they want snowflake to feel special 24/7. Equitable access to these programs is a *good* thing.

- a white UMC mom

The fact is, last year the universal screening had already been implemented, but kids from HGC got regular acceptance rates. You can search and find multiple threads here. The selection criteria changed dramatically only from this year (and onward).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I find this "mid-west humility" hilariously pretentious. Especially, the final "teaching moment. Sorry, but it is. Great that your kid got in and did well. But, when 2 kids from CS get in and Oakview has "no"s across the board w/ 5 kids still waiting, that is beyond the realm of the bigger pool theory. There are clearly other factors at play. Will be interesting to see how next year at the magnets plays out.

You think it is? I don't think it is.

I'm not the Midwestern PP, although I am also a PP and also from the Midwest.

MCPS literally says there are other factors: http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/curriculum/specialprograms/middle/Frequently%20Asked%20Questions%20Eastern%20and%20Takoma%20Park%20Magnet%20ProgramsFINAL.pdf

One of the criteria is "availability of peer group within the local school."

Anonymous wrote:

I find this "mid-west humility" hilariously pretentious. Especially, the final "teaching moment. Sorry, but it is. Great that your kid got in and did well. But, when 2 kids from CS get in and Oakview has "no"s across the board w/ 5 kids still waiting, that is beyond the realm of the bigger pool theory. There are clearly other factors at play. Will be interesting to see how next year at the magnets plays out.

You think it is? I don't think it is.

I'm not the Midwestern PP, although I am also a PP and also from the Midwest.