Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:44
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the bigger issue is that aside from TJ, why was FCPS not in the top 500?
Because we work so hard, we deserve the trophy! wah-wah-wah!
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:41
Subject: Re:Newsweek high school rankings
Anonymous wrote:Pathtetic. How many people actually care what high school you went to lolz
Parents care what high school their kid(s) attend.
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:31
Subject: Re:Newsweek high school rankings
Pathtetic. How many people actually care what high school you went to lolz
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:30
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
Anonymous wrote:The TJ model is fine, but there should be far more than one of them. Maybe 7 is a good number....
fine for... TJ kids/families?
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:28
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
The TJ model is fine, but there should be far more than one of them. Maybe 7 is a good number....
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:25
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:FCPS has all their top students together in one place so they can claim number 1. It's really hard to compare that with MCPS with seven test in magnets, kids at top W schools where 5 were in the top 500 (and that is not the schools where the magents are located) so it's not so trivial to compare.
This is very true. The smart kids in MCPS are spread out all over the place. But, I think "smart" or having high SAT scores is generally a by-product of a student's SES.
I am a MD resident, my thought is it's probably not a great idea to put all high achieving students in 1 school. Other than test scores, high achieving students create a culture of competition and achievement and it's better if those things are spread out. Just MHO.
I completely agree. I think MCPS model is better than TJ model.
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:22
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:FCPS has all their top students together in one place so they can claim number 1. It's really hard to compare that with MCPS with seven test in magnets, kids at top W schools where 5 were in the top 500 (and that is not the schools where the magents are located) so it's not so trivial to compare.
This is very true. The smart kids in MCPS are spread out all over the place. But, I think "smart" or having high SAT scores is generally a by-product of a student's SES.
I am a MD resident, my thought is it's probably not a great idea to put all high achieving students in 1 school. Other than test scores, high achieving students create a culture of competition and achievement and it's better if those things are spread out. Just MHO.
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:16
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
Anonymous wrote:FCPS has all their top students together in one place so they can claim number 1. It's really hard to compare that with MCPS with seven test in magnets, kids at top W schools where 5 were in the top 500 (and that is not the schools where the magents are located) so it's not so trivial to compare.
This is very true. The smart kids in MCPS are spread out all over the place. But, I think "smart" or having high SAT scores is generally a by-product of a student's SES.
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:12
Subject: Re:Newsweek high school rankings
FCPS has all their top students together in one place so they can claim number 1
I've always sort of wondered if this is a good idea.
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:07
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
FCPS has all their top students together in one place so they can claim number 1. It's really hard to compare that with MCPS with seven test in magnets, kids at top W schools where 5 were in the top 500 (and that is not the schools where the magents are located) so it's not so trivial to compare.
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:04
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
Honestly, the bigger issue is that aside from TJ, why was FCPS not in the top 500?
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:02
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Blair only has 100 students per grade?
The best comparison would be the top SAT scores of Blair against the top 100 SAT scores of TJ.
Blair science magnet supposedly has about 100 kids and Blair CAP has about 80 kids. RM IB has about 100 kids and PHS magnet program has about 100 kids.
If you want to compare like for like, shouldn't you just be looking at STEM based magnets in MCPS vs TJ, since TJ is a STEM based magnet also? So, Blair and the STEM magnet in Poolesville. Not sure if IB RM would count.
PSAT has 2 "verbal sections" (reading, writing) and only 1 math section so RM IB and Blair CAP should be included.
Anonymous
08/20/2015 15:02
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
Anonymous wrote:Blair only has 100 students per grade?
The best comparison would be the top SAT scores of Blair against the top 100 SAT scores of TJ.
Why not all of TJ? It's school vs school? Based on your logic lets go top 10 versus top 10. I bet we may have perfect scores and can say they are equal !
Anonymous
08/20/2015 14:58
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Blair only has 100 students per grade?
The best comparison would be the top SAT scores of Blair against the top 100 SAT scores of TJ.
Blair science magnet supposedly has about 100 kids and Blair CAP has about 80 kids. RM IB has about 100 kids and PHS magnet program has about 100 kids.
If you want to compare like for like, shouldn't you just be looking at STEM based magnets in MCPS vs TJ, since TJ is a STEM based magnet also? So, Blair and the STEM magnet in Poolesville. Not sure if IB RM would count.
Anonymous
08/20/2015 14:56
Subject: Newsweek high school rankings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I would love to see MPCS magnet (Blair, RM/IB, PHS) vs. TJ comparison. And as for NMSF numbers, MD's cutoff is usually higher than VA cutoff by 2 pts. (221 vs 219 this past year for example). If MD's cutoff was 219, there would be A LOT more kids making the list. There are a lot of kids around 220 who barely missed the cut.
"It's actually 129 out of 422 (from student services office of TJ) which is 30.56% versus 66 out of 280[200 (Blair magnet + RM IB program) plus Blair's other Humanities magnet program Communication Arts program (CAP) of about 80] = 23.57% (not even counting PHS number) and thus TJ actually had more semifinalists than Blair and RM magnets (minus PHS) combined numbers not less."
Again, it's not very meaningful since VA and MD have different cutoff scores. Assuming your numbers are correct, 30.56% of kids scored 219 or above and 23.57% kids scored 221 or above. Nothing more, nothing less.
How many kids are in the Poolesville magnet program?
Assuming 100 kids for Poolesville, it would be 66/380 = 17.3%. So, 30% v. 17%.
Beyond fuzzy math? Are you including the National Merit scholars from Poolsville or just zeroing them out to try and make TJ look better? National Merit has cut off numbers so that about the same numbers from each state are awarded. MD having a higher number than VA clearly means there are MORE smarter kids in MD than VA!! Try to disprove that with your number one nonsense.... So looking at SAT scores would be a good comparison. Do we include the top kids from MCPS W schools attending the top 500 schools, where FCPS only has TJ, which of the other MCPS and since TJ takes from other counties let's take the top from the rest of MD - oh yeah, we already known MD has a higher cutoff than VA for merit scholars so we know the answer.
fuzzy math a lot?