Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please- if MC offered vouchers to these cram classes very few would take advantage of the opportunities.

That sounds like a terrible solution. A simpler option might be to simply apply things like local norms.

why is it a terrible solution? They could offer the classes at the schools. Magnet programs require a lot of HW and studying. If these kids aren't prepared to do that, including studying on the w/e, then why should they be in the magnet program?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with MCPS paying for tutoring and prep classes for under privileged children. I grew up lower income to uneducated immigrant parents who don't speak English.

But lowering the threshold doesn't serve the program, or the kids. Provide the support, but don't lower the expectations. All that does is provide a crutch for the kid. Life doesn't provide a crutch forever.

Yeah I agree with you and PP. Because there are more 99 percentile kids than spots in programs. Don’t lower standards. Provide opportunities to meet that standard, from the earliest possible age. So many non-profits and businesses have diversity initiatives that are reasonably effective. MCPS can too, but needs to be smart about it. Enfranchise kids early rather than waiting until double digits, when it’s much tougher to do.

I don't think anybody here has talked about lowering standards they talked about creating a level playing field so that all children could access these opportunities not just those wealthy enough to afford expensive prep classes.

Clearly you did not read the previous posts then.

I did and they only suggested leveling the playing field, but I understand that's confusing to someone who is privileged.

Please describe what level is to you. Is it just getting rid of all prep classes? No differentiation in school?

I'm the first PP up thread.. I think some think that "leveling the playing field" is looking at which zip code you live in and setting the threshold based on that because they think anyone from a certain zip code who scores above a certain point must have been tutored. But, that is not the case. There are many students from all walks of life who are "outliers" and need more challenging academics. It is not and should not be based on skin color or your zip code or your parent's income level.

Then there are those who think if you were lucky enough to be born to certain parents then you don't need another yet another "privilege" like the magnet program. You would do fine without it.

But the problem with this way of thinking is:

1. public schools shouldn't be picking and choosing "winners" and "losers". That's not the job of a public school. As I said, I have no issues with public schools paying for additional tutoring and even after school care, but it should not be setting criteria based on who your parents are. That's what racists did not that long ago.
2. the whole point of a magnet is to draw in higher income students to a lower performing area. If you do away with that, it will cause even more segregation, though it would certainly reduce transportation costs.
I have no problem with set aside seats for in bound students. I think that's a great way to admit more students from the less affluent areas.

3. If MCPS disregards the higher performing, high income families, such families will no longer want to be part of MCPS. The scores will start to drop quickly.

MCPS likes to tout AP exam participation rate and scores, but at the same time look down at those who prep to get those high scores. You can't have it both ways.

I bought my kid a cogat book from amazon. It was like $40 or something. That's the only prep my kid did. MCPS could certainly buy one for low income students who are interested. They could even offer weekend prep classes to low income students.

But setting the threshold by zip code and income level doesn't serve the mission of the magnet program, or at the end of the day, the students in the program. Life is tough, and when you constantly rely on a crutch, when reality hits, you won't be able to stand on your own. When that kid leaves HS, do you imagine that kid will continue to have MCPS level the playing field for that kid for life?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A coworker told me that no one gets in without prep. Well my kid did. From his circle of Blair friends, there was one child who was prepped. While there are families who prep, I also think people use that idea to justify why their kid did not get in. In reality it is like very competitive colleges. Lots of very talented kids just don't get in.

I don't think it is appropriate to use the cohort method for HS students since in HS there are many levels of classes available. In middle school there is much less differentiation (or none).

Agree 1000 percent. If your kid did not get in don’t use it as an excuse. It’s so much easier to blame others.. Do things and try to have your kid challenge themselves wherever they are.

Disagree 10,000%. Why should wealthy areas that invest in prep be given an edge over everyone else? Level the playing field and give all kids a fair chance at this opportunity not just those who attend the best schools and take outside enrichment.

Why there is always the generalized conclusion that wealthy families invest in prep? For many families that really value education, they are willing to spend the money and resource on their children's education instead of any personal and/or household extra or luxury items. How do you level the playing field when different families have different priorities and values?

Anonymous wrote:Please- if MC offered vouchers to these cram classes very few would take advantage of the opportunities.

That sounds like a terrible solution. A simpler option might be to simply apply things like local norms.

Please- if MC offered vouchers to these cram classes very few would take advantage of the opportunities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A coworker told me that no one gets in without prep. Well my kid did. From his circle of Blair friends, there was one child who was prepped. While there are families who prep, I also think people use that idea to justify why their kid did not get in. In reality it is like very competitive colleges. Lots of very talented kids just don't get in.

I don't think it is appropriate to use the cohort method for HS students since in HS there are many levels of classes available. In middle school there is much less differentiation (or none).

+1 My child made Poolesville SMCS a few years back with no prep. He is just really focused, gets new concepts very quickly and has a near photographic memory. Now, he is in the top 6% of his junior class. And, we are not Asian, but Black. So much for stereotypes.

When I was at poolesville most of my friends also had gone to the prep center but they hated to admit it. Most would deny it emphatically but almost everyone prepped. It's one of those dirty little secrets. People just don't make the cut without it.

Except for all the people that do. Clearly some kids are prepped and some are not. There is also the difference between spending some time at Mathnaseum over the summer in ES and going to a Blair or Bust prep center in 6-8th grade.

The funny part is I'm not against anyone pursuing knowledge or studying on their own. I just think that kids who are from less affluent areas who don't go to the Blair or Bust prep center should have a shit a these opportunities. I know a kid whose family can afford these expensive classes will be fine no matter where they go but for someone who is not that lucky this opportunity could be life changing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A coworker told me that no one gets in without prep. Well my kid did. From his circle of Blair friends, there was one child who was prepped. While there are families who prep, I also think people use that idea to justify why their kid did not get in. In reality it is like very competitive colleges. Lots of very talented kids just don't get in.

I don't think it is appropriate to use the cohort method for HS students since in HS there are many levels of classes available. In middle school there is much less differentiation (or none).

+1 My child made Poolesville SMCS a few years back with no prep. He is just really focused, gets new concepts very quickly and has a near photographic memory. Now, he is in the top 6% of his junior class. And, we are not Asian, but Black. So much for stereotypes.

When I was at poolesville most of my friends also had gone to the prep center but they hated to admit it. Most would deny it emphatically but almost everyone prepped. It's one of those dirty little secrets. People just don't make the cut without it.

Except for all the people that do. Clearly some kids are prepped and some are not. There is also the difference between spending some time at Mathnaseum over the summer in ES and going to a Blair or Bust prep center in 6-8th grade.

Anonymous wrote:Like all threads about magnet programs, this thread is just a chance to tell us all about your brilliant, high-achieving children, who don't need to prep or study.

These anecdotes are mostly figments of someone's imagination with an agenda to preserve their privilege and status quo.

Like all threads about magnet programs, this thread is just a chance to tell us all about your brilliant, high-achieving children, who don't need to prep or study.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A coworker told me that no one gets in without prep. Well my kid did. From his circle of Blair friends, there was one child who was prepped. While there are families who prep, I also think people use that idea to justify why their kid did not get in. In reality it is like very competitive colleges. Lots of very talented kids just don't get in.

I don't think it is appropriate to use the cohort method for HS students since in HS there are many levels of classes available. In middle school there is much less differentiation (or none).

Maybe 25%-30% manage without prep but the majority are in classes from early on.

Several Asian cultures (Chinese, Indian) are heavily focused on education, particularly STEM. Kids have tutors and are often working 2-3 years ahead in math. Of course that's reflected in the test scores. Not necessarily a bad thing. Those families devote lots of resources to education and sometimes music lessons from a young age, and those kids do very well as a result. Why is it their problem so many white families put their resources toward athletics instead? Support starts at home.

What about families that can’t afford prep classes? Do you just assume their kids lack ability?

Most of the families I know who pay for tutoring are middle class not affluent, but are willing to make sacrifices of time and money for their kids' education. How do we help kids from lower socioeconomic strata? Early interventions, the only way. Identify bright FARMS kids *early* and give provide extra academic support for them. If you're modifying the system to admit kids who may not be able to keep up with those who are, practically speaking, privileged with a years-long head start, it's not really helping them in a meaningful way. The only reasonable path is to level the playing field very early and commit to ongoing support for those bright kids who lack material advantages.

No-one is saying a kid scoring in the 85% isn't bright but can that child keep up with a kid scoring not just 99% in their grade but 99% several grades ahead? Those two children are in very different places. We don't know how much is tied to academic ability, but we do know the academic preparation and ability to jump into a very challenging magnet curriculum are not the same.

Yes, they can, in my experience.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with MCPS paying for tutoring and prep classes for under privileged children. I grew up lower income to uneducated immigrant parents who don't speak English.

But lowering the threshold doesn't serve the program, or the kids. Provide the support, but don't lower the expectations. All that does is provide a crutch for the kid. Life doesn't provide a crutch forever.

Yeah I agree with you and PP. Because there are more 99 percentile kids than spots in programs. Don’t lower standards. Provide opportunities to meet that standard, from the earliest possible age. So many non-profits and businesses have diversity initiatives that are reasonably effective. MCPS can too, but needs to be smart about it. Enfranchise kids early rather than waiting until double digits, when it’s much tougher to do.

I don't think anybody here has talked about lowering standards they talked about creating a level playing field so that all children could access these opportunities not just those wealthy enough to afford expensive prep classes.

Clearly you did not read the previous posts then.

I did and they only suggested leveling the playing field, but I understand that's confusing to someone who is privileged.

Please describe what level is to you. Is it just getting rid of all prep classes? No differentiation in school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My RMIB kid did not prep either. He's always been a 99 percentile test taker.

Mine did! They started in 3rd grade 2 hours a day 5 days a week, but no way they would've been admitted without it.

My RMIB kid didn’t prep either. He has always been very driven and a quick learner.

So is mine but almost every one of their friends at RMIB attended prep. It turns out its virtually required for admission these days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with MCPS paying for tutoring and prep classes for under privileged children. I grew up lower income to uneducated immigrant parents who don't speak English.

But lowering the threshold doesn't serve the program, or the kids. Provide the support, but don't lower the expectations. All that does is provide a crutch for the kid. Life doesn't provide a crutch forever.

Yeah I agree with you and PP. Because there are more 99 percentile kids than spots in programs. Don’t lower standards. Provide opportunities to meet that standard, from the earliest possible age. So many non-profits and businesses have diversity initiatives that are reasonably effective. MCPS can too, but needs to be smart about it. Enfranchise kids early rather than waiting until double digits, when it’s much tougher to do.

I don't think anybody here has talked about lowering standards they talked about creating a level playing field so that all children could access these opportunities not just those wealthy enough to afford expensive prep classes.

Clearly you did not read the previous posts then.

I did and they only suggested leveling the playing field, but I understand that's confusing to someone who is privileged.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My RMIB kid did not prep either. He's always been a 99 percentile test taker.

Mine did! They started in 3rd grade 2 hours a day 5 days a week, but no way they would've been admitted without it.

My RMIB kid didn’t prep either. He has always been very driven and a quick learner.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with MCPS paying for tutoring and prep classes for under privileged children. I grew up lower income to uneducated immigrant parents who don't speak English.

But lowering the threshold doesn't serve the program, or the kids. Provide the support, but don't lower the expectations. All that does is provide a crutch for the kid. Life doesn't provide a crutch forever.

Yeah I agree with you and PP. Because there are more 99 percentile kids than spots in programs. Don’t lower standards. Provide opportunities to meet that standard, from the earliest possible age. So many non-profits and businesses have diversity initiatives that are reasonably effective. MCPS can too, but needs to be smart about it. Enfranchise kids early rather than waiting until double digits, when it’s much tougher to do.

I don't think anybody here has talked about lowering standards they talked about creating a level playing field so that all children could access these opportunities not just those wealthy enough to afford expensive prep classes.

Clearly you did not read the previous posts then.