Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's laughable that someone would think the magnet program should reflect the demographics of the county. If that's what mcps is after, then those programs should be removed indeed.

Why is it laughable? I'm not laughing.

Just look at test scores by demographics. That is the answer

http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/Entity.aspx?K=15AAAA

According to PARCC results, there were ~2400 Black and ~3450 Hispanic students in grade 3 in MCPS 2015 school year. Fewer than 10 students met "level 5: exceeded expectations" in both Math and reading in each group.
There were ~1600 Asians, 389/185 met in math/reading. ~3500 White, 472/316 met in math/reading. These are the base for the 4th grade HGC. I will be a genius's task to achieve racial-balance in HGC without hurting the quality of the program.

There were 122 black 4th graders who scored 5 on last year's PARCC. DD was one of them. She is not in compacted math. None of the white students in her grade at her school who are in compacted math scored 5 on the PARCC math. Does that say something about the selection process? Does it say something about the quality of instruction in compacted math?
No one is saying to allow underachieving black and latino kids into accelerated programs. But there are high achieving black and latino students who are not being included.

either you are not telling the truth, or MCPS had an error in the report card. According to the 2015 PARCC performance county summary, the count of 4th grade black students in level 5 math is fewer than 10.
The number is consistent in all grades.

This shows it's zero for level 5 in math for all ES/MS grades. Perhaps PP is thinking level 4?

http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/PARCC/Math/2015_PARCC_Performance_MA_15AAAA.pdf

Anonymous wrote:
But evidently the PARCC scores are not a good measure of --well, let's call it HGC potential. Given that there are kids who did not score 5/5 on the PARCC test who are in an HGC, and I bet that there are some kids who did score 5/5 in the PARCC tests who are not in an HGC.

Plus, "should the demographics of the HGC be the same as the demographics of the county as a whole" and "could the demographics of the HGC be more like the demographics of the county as a whole" are two different questions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's laughable that someone would think the magnet program should reflect the demographics of the county. If that's what mcps is after, then those programs should be removed indeed.

Why is it laughable? I'm not laughing.

Just look at test scores by demographics. That is the answer

http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/Entity.aspx?K=15AAAA

According to PARCC results, there were ~2400 Black and ~3450 Hispanic students in grade 3 in MCPS 2015 school year. Fewer than 10 students met "level 5: exceeded expectations" in both Math and reading in each group.
There were ~1600 Asians, 389/185 met in math/reading. ~3500 White, 472/316 met in math/reading. These are the base for the 4th grade HGC. I will be a genius's task to achieve racial-balance in HGC without hurting the quality of the program.

There were 122 black 4th graders who scored 5 on last year's PARCC. DD was one of them. She is not in compacted math. None of the white students in her grade at her school who are in compacted math scored 5 on the PARCC math. Does that say something about the selection process? Does it say something about the quality of instruction in compacted math?
No one is saying to allow underachieving black and latino kids into accelerated programs. But there are high achieving black and latino students who are not being included.

either you are not telling the truth, or MCPS had an error in the report card. According to the 2015 PARCC performance county summary, the count of 4th grade black students in level 5 math is fewer than 10.
The number is consistent in all grades.

This shows it's zero for level 5 in math for all ES/MS grades. Perhaps PP is thinking level 4?

http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/PARCC/Math/2015_PARCC_Performance_MA_15AAAA.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's laughable that someone would think the magnet program should reflect the demographics of the county. If that's what mcps is after, then those programs should be removed indeed.

Why is it laughable? I'm not laughing.

Just look at test scores by demographics. That is the answer

http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/Entity.aspx?K=15AAAA

According to PARCC results, there were ~2400 Black and ~3450 Hispanic students in grade 3 in MCPS 2015 school year. Fewer than 10 students met "level 5: exceeded expectations" in both Math and reading in each group.
There were ~1600 Asians, 389/185 met in math/reading. ~3500 White, 472/316 met in math/reading. These are the base for the 4th grade HGC. I will be a genius's task to achieve racial-balance in HGC without hurting the quality of the program.

There were 122 black 4th graders who scored 5 on last year's PARCC. DD was one of them. She is not in compacted math. None of the white students in her grade at her school who are in compacted math scored 5 on the PARCC math. Does that say something about the selection process? Does it say something about the quality of instruction in compacted math?
No one is saying to allow underachieving black and latino kids into accelerated programs. But there are high achieving black and latino students who are not being included.

either you are not telling the truth, or MCPS had an error in the report card. According to the 2015 PARCC performance county summary, the count of 4th grade black students in level 5 math is fewer than 10.
The number is consistent in all grades.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's laughable that someone would think the magnet program should reflect the demographics of the county. If that's what mcps is after, then those programs should be removed indeed.

Why is it laughable? I'm not laughing.

Just look at test scores by demographics. That is the answer

http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/Entity.aspx?K=15AAAA

According to PARCC results, there were ~2400 Black and ~3450 Hispanic students in grade 3 in MCPS 2015 school year. Fewer than 10 students met "level 5: exceeded expectations" in both Math and reading in each group.
There were ~1600 Asians, 389/185 met in math/reading. ~3500 White, 472/316 met in math/reading. These are the base for the 4th grade HGC. I will be a genius's task to achieve racial-balance in HGC without hurting the quality of the program.

There were 122 black 4th graders who scored 5 on last year's PARCC. DD was one of them. She is not in compacted math. None of the white students in her grade at her school who are in compacted math scored 5 on the PARCC math. Does that say something about the selection process? Does it say something about the quality of instruction in compacted math?
No one is saying to allow underachieving black and latino kids into accelerated programs. But there are high achieving black and latino students who are not being included.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the demographics of the kids who scored a 4 or a 5 on the PARCC? Probably more like the county as a whole. And that's the population that might approximate the HGC population. Although I bet that there are also some kids in an HGC who scored a 3.

They published it, and no surprise, most of the kids who score 4/5 are Asian or White.

Could you please be more specific than "most"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There were 122 black 4th graders who scored 5 on last year's PARCC. DD was one of them. She is not in compacted math. None of the white students in her grade at her school who are in compacted math scored 5 on the PARCC math. Does that say something about the selection process? Does it say something about the quality of instruction in compacted math?
No one is saying to allow underachieving black and latino kids into accelerated programs. But there are high achieving black and latino students who are not being included.

So she was excluded since she is black? My neighbors daughter is white and she was originally excluded. The process is not perfect but way better than
a) not having a process
or
b) admitting based on race quotas

Those are both straw men. Nobody is advocating admission without an admission process. And nobody is advocating admission based on race quotas.

Except that is exactly what the choice study recommended.

Which choice study? The choice study I read did not recommend those things. Not to mention that Option A would be infeasible (how do you admit somebody to a program without having an admissions process?), and Option B would be illegal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the demographics of the kids who scored a 4 or a 5 on the PARCC? Probably more like the county as a whole. And that's the population that might approximate the HGC population. Although I bet that there are also some kids in an HGC who scored a 3.

They published it, and no surprise, most of the kids who score 4/5 are Asian or White.

Could you please be more specific than "most"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the demographics of the kids who scored a 4 or a 5 on the PARCC? Probably more like the county as a whole. And that's the population that might approximate the HGC population. Although I bet that there are also some kids in an HGC who scored a 3.

They published it, and no surprise, most of the kids who score 4/5 are Asian or White.

Anonymous wrote:What are the demographics of the kids who scored a 4 or a 5 on the PARCC? Probably more like the county as a whole. And that's the population that might approximate the HGC population. Although I bet that there are also some kids in an HGC who scored a 3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There were 122 black 4th graders who scored 5 on last year's PARCC. DD was one of them. She is not in compacted math. None of the white students in her grade at her school who are in compacted math scored 5 on the PARCC math. Does that say something about the selection process? Does it say something about the quality of instruction in compacted math?
No one is saying to allow underachieving black and latino kids into accelerated programs. But there are high achieving black and latino students who are not being included.

So she was excluded since she is black? My neighbors daughter is white and she was originally excluded. The process is not perfect but way better than
a) not having a process
or
b) admitting based on race quotas

Those are both straw men. Nobody is advocating admission without an admission process. And nobody is advocating admission based on race quotas.

Except that is exactly what the choice study recommended.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There were 122 black 4th graders who scored 5 on last year's PARCC. DD was one of them. She is not in compacted math. None of the white students in her grade at her school who are in compacted math scored 5 on the PARCC math. Does that say something about the selection process? Does it say something about the quality of instruction in compacted math?
No one is saying to allow underachieving black and latino kids into accelerated programs. But there are high achieving black and latino students who are not being included.

So she was excluded since she is black? My neighbors daughter is white and she was originally excluded. The process is not perfect but way better than
a) not having a process
or
b) admitting based on race quotas

Those are both straw men. Nobody is advocating admission without an admission process. And nobody is advocating admission based on race quotas.