Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For tests like map that result in higher scores for outside enrichment they are not necessarily enrolling smarter kids or those with more aptitude. This would reward parents for pushing their kids ahead ...

Have 50% more students like Pyle also impacts the number of highly able students at a school.

Absolutely! It is interesting though looking at Pyle to see that they seemed to have a larger percentage of students doing well on the state assessments relative to their "highly able" MAP and Cogat numbers of students.

Who cares? The state assessments (PARCC) are the least interesting and least important of those numbers, especially for purposes of determining giftedness and magnet admissions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For tests like map that result in higher scores for outside enrichment they are not necessarily enrolling smarter kids or those with more aptitude. This would reward parents for pushing their kids ahead ...

Have 50% more students like Pyle also impacts the number of highly able students at a school.

Absolutely! It is interesting though looking at Pyle to see that they seemed to have a larger percentage of students doing well on the state assessments relative to their "highly able" MAP and Cogat numbers of students.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think that's necessarily true as there are lots of kids, ours included, who do not formallly supplement but score well. But I acknowledge that's from years of being in an environment that probably enriched them just by being at the dinner table. This is why MCPS used to use the Cogat too and that picked up some kids who have the ability to do better but are not for some reason.

I think using some kind of ability screening is really important at the elementary level because you have the time to develop those kids in a targeted way.

This. The current lottery process with a low-bar MAP threshold pool criterion is truly systematic discrimination against any kid with talent but not living in good school zone nor has parent support/outside enrichment.
Not just MCPS. As a first-generation immigrant who work from many years in high education system, I don't understand why the help was not provided from the very beginning when kids are all blank papers and all start from a similar scratch line. The leg-up and resource tilting is significant starting somewhere from HS or college, but it's too late already.

Anonymous wrote:For tests like map that result in higher scores for outside enrichment they are not necessarily enrolling smarter kids or those with more aptitude. This would reward parents for pushing their kids ahead ...

Have 50% more students like Pyle also impacts the number of highly able students at a school.

I don't think that's necessarily true as there are lots of kids, ours included, who do not formallly supplement but score well. But I acknowledge that's from years of being in an environment that probably enriched them just by being at the dinner table. This is why MCPS used to use the Cogat too and that picked up some kids who have the ability to do better but are not for some reason.

I think using some kind of ability screening is really important at the elementary level because you have the time to develop those kids in a targeted way.

For tests like map that result in higher scores for outside enrichment they are not necessarily enrolling smarter kids or those with more aptitude. This would reward parents for pushing their kids ahead ...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think that if you are coming from a high performing school like Frost you are more likely to find a larger group of 99th percentile kids at Frost then you are at the magnets. This is based on the MCPS info that places like Frost had peer cohorts greater than 20.

In reality their high performing cohorts are probably much larger.

You might think that but the data the county released indicates that's simply not the case.

NP. Here's one chart MCPS used to show size of infamous "cohorts" by middle school.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/msmagnet/about/MS%20Magnet%20Field%20Test%20Data%20by%20Sending%20MS.pdf

Seems like there isn't a big difference between these schools but to get a real sense would need to normalize the values to account for population differences. For example, Pyle has maybe 30% more students than SSI or Frost.

The total size of the school doesn't matter if they cohort properly. Your child can only been in 1 class in 1 period and all those kids would presumably be cohorted together so it doesn't matter if there are 40 other classes going on at the same time or 100.

Good point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think that if you are coming from a high performing school like Frost you are more likely to find a larger group of 99th percentile kids at Frost then you are at the magnets. This is based on the MCPS info that places like Frost had peer cohorts greater than 20.

In reality their high performing cohorts are probably much larger.

You might think that but the data the county released indicates that's simply not the case.

NP. Here's one chart MCPS used to show size of infamous "cohorts" by middle school.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/msmagnet/about/MS%20Magnet%20Field%20Test%20Data%20by%20Sending%20MS.pdf

Seems like there isn't a big difference between these schools but to get a real sense would need to normalize the values to account for population differences. For example, Pyle has maybe 30% more students than SSI or Frost.

The total size of the school doesn't matter if they cohort properly. Your child can only been in 1 class in 1 period and all those kids would presumably be cohorted together so it doesn't matter if there are 40 other classes going on at the same time or 100.

Sure, any of these schools could fill 1-3 classes of higher-achievers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think that if you are coming from a high performing school like Frost you are more likely to find a larger group of 99th percentile kids at Frost then you are at the magnets. This is based on the MCPS info that places like Frost had peer cohorts greater than 20.

In reality their high performing cohorts are probably much larger.

You might think that but the data the county released indicates that's simply not the case.

NP. Here's one chart MCPS used to show size of infamous "cohorts" by middle school.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/msmagnet/about/MS%20Magnet%20Field%20Test%20Data%20by%20Sending%20MS.pdf

Seems like there isn't a big difference between these schools but to get a real sense would need to normalize the values to account for population differences. For example, Pyle has maybe 30% more students than SSI or Frost.

The total size of the school doesn't matter if they cohort properly. Your child can only been in 1 class in 1 period and all those kids would presumably be cohorted together so it doesn't matter if there are 40 other classes going on at the same time or 100.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think that if you are coming from a high performing school like Frost you are more likely to find a larger group of 99th percentile kids at Frost then you are at the magnets. This is based on the MCPS info that places like Frost had peer cohorts greater than 20.

In reality their high performing cohorts are probably much larger.

You might think that but the data the county released indicates that's simply not the case.

What do you mean?
According to this data which is before the changes you see dozens at some of the schools which is a lot.
Do we have data on the magnet lottery composition? What % are 99th percentile?
In the lawsuit from the Asian American parents you also some information about a large number of children from one elementary or middle school being 99th percentile but not getting into the magnets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think that if you are coming from a high performing school like Frost you are more likely to find a larger group of 99th percentile kids at Frost then you are at the magnets. This is based on the MCPS info that places like Frost had peer cohorts greater than 20.

In reality their high performing cohorts are probably much larger.

You might think that but the data the county released indicates that's simply not the case.

NP. Here's one chart MCPS used to show size of infamous "cohorts" by middle school.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/msmagnet/about/MS%20Magnet%20Field%20Test%20Data%20by%20Sending%20MS.pdf

Seems like there isn't a big difference between these schools but to get a real sense would need to normalize the values to account for population differences. For example, Pyle has maybe 30% more students than SSI or Frost.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think that if you are coming from a high performing school like Frost you are more likely to find a larger group of 99th percentile kids at Frost then you are at the magnets. This is based on the MCPS info that places like Frost had peer cohorts greater than 20.

In reality their high performing cohorts are probably much larger.

You might think that but the data the county released indicates that's simply not the case.

NP. Here's one chart MCPS used to show size of infamous "cohorts" by middle school.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/schools/msmagnet/about/MS%20Magnet%20Field%20Test%20Data%20by%20Sending%20MS.pdf

Anonymous wrote:I do think that if you are coming from a high performing school like Frost you are more likely to find a larger group of 99th percentile kids at Frost then you are at the magnets. This is based on the MCPS info that places like Frost had peer cohorts greater than 20.

In reality their high performing cohorts are probably much larger.

You might think that but the data the county released indicates that's simply not the case.

I do think that if you are coming from a high performing school like Frost you are more likely to find a larger group of 99th percentile kids at Frost then you are at the magnets. This is based on the MCPS info that places like Frost had peer cohorts greater than 20.

In reality their high performing cohorts are probably much larger.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our neighboring Thomas Jefferson HS gives seats to the top performers and then take lottery among top X% in every MS. This admission process is ruled recently as discrimination against Asians. Yet, it's way much better than the stupid pure-lottery admission process now at MCPS.

MCPS is suiciding its own reputable GT program.

You're an idiot. Thomas Jefferson is a High School. Currently there are no lotteries in the HS admission process.
Not sure what you're trying to compare.

HS has eliminated the CoGAT test this year. How to differentiate students with inflated GPA and MAP-test tail distribution which is acknowledged by NEWA that should not be used for differentiation?
Also, wait and see. Things could become worse next year and they could easily eliminate the HS holistic review because they have successfully removed the ES and MS ones.

This is not just discrimination against Asian. This is a true discrimination against any 99%ers in poor school zones and have no parent support. They are now thrown into a big ocean without any hope of getting a chance.

Not so fast. They moved the threshold MAP-R percentile for being placed in the lottery for CES from 75% last year to 85% this year. The 85% threshold that is being used this year is a return to previous levels for CES entry. So I wouldn't say things are getting worse. I think MCPS is tightening entry, at least for this year compared to last year. We'll have to see what they do next year.

That's not credible. Prior to the lottery even our local CES was turning away kids with 97% national score on the CogAT.

It is credible. Even before the pandemic there was a 15-percentile spread among kids who attended CES. Cogat scores weren't the only criteria, so kids got turned away for a myriad of reasons, including grades and teacher bias.

Yes there was a small percentile of <5% below the 95% but today the vast majority of these kids are below the 95%. Again it isn't credible.