Montgomery Blair/Albert Einstein vs. B-CC/Whitman -- help me understand the differences

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just about wanting to avoid schools where the primary focus is on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level. The peer groups at the W schools are academically stronger and encourage each other to excel.

+1 this has been our experience. Add WJ to your list OP. Large ranges of homes, townhomes, condos, and apartment in zone.

My kids are both Blair graduates and had zero classes where the "primary focus (was) on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level." Both of my kids attended T30 colleges and are highly successful, independent adults now at 25 and 22.

DP and yeah, this example is yet another of people not understanding that there are sizable cohorts of above grade level kids at every single high school in MCPS. Smart kids will have peer groups. They're smaller at some schools than others, and variations in income level, but let's stop mistaking parental income for children's intelligence.

and at a HS of 3K students there's a fairly large high achieving cohort

And also a very large cohort of low achieving kids, up to no good kids, mad at the world kids. What we are talking about is the ratios of said cohorts between the different schools. I would wager there are more kids who are functionally illiterate at Blair than Magnet kids. And while there is some good and bad reasons for that related to economic realities and ESOL. Why not go somewhere where the good kid cohort is the vast majority opposed to a subgroup if you have the means . I am sure there are a few Blair families that could have gotten into a starter home IB for Whitman but every single family at Whitman could have sent their kids to Blair if they wanted to and gotten one of the nicest homes in the area in the process, 2mil goes a looooooong way in the east county. You will never convince me that concentration of high achievers in the West don't know a little bit more about what it takes to achieve than the concentration of average to low achieving families that are naturally IB in the east.

WTF are low-achieving families? Those that can’t spend 2 million on a house? You seem to be confusing achievement with wealth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just about wanting to avoid schools where the primary focus is on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level. The peer groups at the W schools are academically stronger and encourage each other to excel.

+1 this has been our experience. Add WJ to your list OP. Large ranges of homes, townhomes, condos, and apartment in zone.

My kids are both Blair graduates and had zero classes where the "primary focus (was) on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level." Both of my kids attended T30 colleges and are highly successful, independent adults now at 25 and 22.

DP and yeah, this example is yet another of people not understanding that there are sizable cohorts of above grade level kids at every single high school in MCPS. Smart kids will have peer groups. They're smaller at some schools than others, and variations in income level, but let's stop mistaking parental income for children's intelligence.

and at a HS of 3K students there's a fairly large high achieving cohort

And also a very large cohort of low achieving kids, up to no good kids, mad at the world kids. What we are talking about is the ratios of said cohorts between the different schools. I would wager there are more kids who are functionally illiterate at Blair than Magnet kids. And while there is some good and bad reasons for that related to economic realities and ESOL. Why not go somewhere where the good kid cohort is the vast majority opposed to a subgroup if you have the means . I am sure there are a few Blair families that could have gotten into a starter home IB for Whitman but every single family at Whitman could have sent their kids to Blair if they wanted to and gotten one of the nicest homes in the area in the process, 2mil goes a looooooong way in the east county. You will never convince me that concentration of high achievers in the West don't know a little bit more about what it takes to achieve than the concentration of average to low achieving families that are naturally IB in the east.

You’re getting a lot of heat for this post but I understand the point. Many schools have a cohort of kids on track to be successful. But the question is what’s the dominant culture of the school. If you have a kid who could go a variety of different directions then that is an important question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing that distinguishes Blair from the other schools is that it hosts the STEM magnet. In 11th and 12th grade students who meet the prereqs are eligible for these classes that aren't available elsewhere. This include anything from genetic analysis, linear algebra, complex analysis, neuroscience, or machine learning courses on par with those offered at Universities.

But at Blair, if you are a non magnet student, aren’t you competing for college spots with magnet students?
Colleges will only take a few kids from each school. I always wonder whether at Blair, the highest performing non-magnet students are at a disadvantage for top colleges compared with the Blair magnet students. Is my analysis wrong?

No, it doesn't work that way.

Yes, it doesn't matter and Blair has much higher admissions to elite colleges than the other schools anyway.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/2021/09/06/college-bound-6/

My child just graduated from Blair and knew people going to top schools who were not in the stem magnet or CAP. It’s a great school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just about wanting to avoid schools where the primary focus is on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level. The peer groups at the W schools are academically stronger and encourage each other to excel.

+1 this has been our experience. Add WJ to your list OP. Large ranges of homes, townhomes, condos, and apartment in zone.

My kids are both Blair graduates and had zero classes where the "primary focus (was) on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level." Both of my kids attended T30 colleges and are highly successful, independent adults now at 25 and 22.

DP and yeah, this example is yet another of people not understanding that there are sizable cohorts of above grade level kids at every single high school in MCPS. Smart kids will have peer groups. They're smaller at some schools than others, and variations in income level, but let's stop mistaking parental income for children's intelligence.

and at a HS of 3K students there's a fairly large high achieving cohort

And also a very large cohort of low achieving kids, up to no good kids, mad at the world kids. What we are talking about is the ratios of said cohorts between the different schools. I would wager there are more kids who are functionally illiterate at Blair than Magnet kids. And while there is some good and bad reasons for that related to economic realities and ESOL. Why not go somewhere where the good kid cohort is the vast majority opposed to a subgroup if you have the means . I am sure there are a few Blair families that could have gotten into a starter home IB for Whitman but every single family at Whitman could have sent their kids to Blair if they wanted to and gotten one of the nicest homes in the area in the process, 2mil goes a looooooong way in the east county. You will never convince me that concentration of high achievers in the West don't know a little bit more about what it takes to achieve than the concentration of average to low achieving families that are naturally IB in the east.

You’re getting a lot of heat for this post but I understand the point. Many schools have a cohort of kids on track to be successful. But the question is what’s the dominant culture of the school. If you have a kid who could go a variety of different directions then that is an important question.

No, you’re not getting it, either. You and PP, who clearly have zero experience with Blair/Einstein/Northwood/etc. think you know what these schools are like. You don’t. You’re assuming all kinds of things about these schools and the kids who attend them (and the families raising them) without actually knowing them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just about wanting to avoid schools where the primary focus is on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level. The peer groups at the W schools are academically stronger and encourage each other to excel.

+1 this has been our experience. Add WJ to your list OP. Large ranges of homes, townhomes, condos, and apartment in zone.

My kids are both Blair graduates and had zero classes where the "primary focus (was) on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level." Both of my kids attended T30 colleges and are highly successful, independent adults now at 25 and 22.

DP and yeah, this example is yet another of people not understanding that there are sizable cohorts of above grade level kids at every single high school in MCPS. Smart kids will have peer groups. They're smaller at some schools than others, and variations in income level, but let's stop mistaking parental income for children's intelligence.

and at a HS of 3K students there's a fairly large high achieving cohort

And also a very large cohort of low achieving kids, up to no good kids, mad at the world kids. What we are talking about is the ratios of said cohorts between the different schools. I would wager there are more kids who are functionally illiterate at Blair than Magnet kids. And while there is some good and bad reasons for that related to economic realities and ESOL. Why not go somewhere where the good kid cohort is the vast majority opposed to a subgroup if you have the means . I am sure there are a few Blair families that could have gotten into a starter home IB for Whitman but every single family at Whitman could have sent their kids to Blair if they wanted to and gotten one of the nicest homes in the area in the process, 2mil goes a looooooong way in the east county. You will never convince me that concentration of high achievers in the West don't know a little bit more about what it takes to achieve than the concentration of average to low achieving families that are naturally IB in the east.

You’re getting a lot of heat for this post but I understand the point. Many schools have a cohort of kids on track to be successful. But the question is what’s the dominant culture of the school. If you have a kid who could go a variety of different directions then that is an important question.

No, you’re not getting it, either. You and PP, who clearly have zero experience with Blair/Einstein/Northwood/etc. think you know what these schools are like. You don’t. You’re assuming all kinds of things about these schools and the kids who attend them (and the families raising them) without actually knowing them.

But life is so much easier with blinkers on!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid's high school isn't on that list, has advanced classes, a magnet program, and far more importantly, a distinct lack of the shark tank mentality we see here.

A lot of the classes having under 20 students is also a massive plus. The teachers are all fantastic.

Please name the school! Thanks.

No. I have before and just gotten a ton of responses from people who don't send their children there telling me it's terrible.

Enjoy the striver hell of your own making. It's what you all wanted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid's high school isn't on that list, has advanced classes, a magnet program, and far more importantly, a distinct lack of the shark tank mentality we see here.

A lot of the classes having under 20 students is also a massive plus. The teachers are all fantastic.

Please name the school! Thanks.

I'm surprised your kid has "a lot" of classes under 20 students. Please name this school.

All of them, I think. Except yoga.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just about wanting to avoid schools where the primary focus is on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level. The peer groups at the W schools are academically stronger and encourage each other to excel.

+1 this has been our experience. Add WJ to your list OP. Large ranges of homes, townhomes, condos, and apartment in zone.

My kids are both Blair graduates and had zero classes where the "primary focus (was) on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level." Both of my kids attended T30 colleges and are highly successful, independent adults now at 25 and 22.

DP and yeah, this example is yet another of people not understanding that there are sizable cohorts of above grade level kids at every single high school in MCPS. Smart kids will have peer groups. They're smaller at some schools than others, and variations in income level, but let's stop mistaking parental income for children's intelligence.

and at a HS of 3K students there's a fairly large high achieving cohort

And also a very large cohort of low achieving kids, up to no good kids, mad at the world kids. What we are talking about is the ratios of said cohorts between the different schools. I would wager there are more kids who are functionally illiterate at Blair than Magnet kids. And while there is some good and bad reasons for that related to economic realities and ESOL. Why not go somewhere where the good kid cohort is the vast majority opposed to a subgroup if you have the means . I am sure there are a few Blair families that could have gotten into a starter home IB for Whitman but every single family at Whitman could have sent their kids to Blair if they wanted to and gotten one of the nicest homes in the area in the process, 2mil goes a looooooong way in the east county. You will never convince me that concentration of high achievers in the West don't know a little bit more about what it takes to achieve than the concentration of average to low achieving families that are naturally IB in the east.

You’re getting a lot of heat for this post but I understand the point. Many schools have a cohort of kids on track to be successful. But the question is what’s the dominant culture of the school. If you have a kid who could go a variety of different directions then that is an important question.

No, you’re not getting it, either. You and PP, who clearly have zero experience with Blair/Einstein/Northwood/etc. think you know what these schools are like. You don’t. You’re assuming all kinds of things about these schools and the kids who attend them (and the families raising them) without actually knowing them.

Two 4s and a 3 on great schools I’m sure they are great for the group of kids who get pushed though if one can just ignore copious amounts kids failing through the crack or perform at grade level. Maybe the Middle class families have more in common with the W parents after all, both pretend that segment of society doesn’t exist but the DCC parents are just better at it because they can do it living next to them while their kids walk in the same halls. The W families just never have to see them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll bite. If you want your kid pushed from the school, skip public education and pay for private.

I don't know what you actually mean but private schools in this area are inferior to MCPS. Only a few can compare to MCPS.

Seriously? My kid went to silver creek and was given sentence starters as their only source of writing. He had an A in math because he could retake anything until he got an A and the teacher point blank told me he was a C in math kinda kid, but that was only when I pushed her for the info.

He’s now at private. There is Hw, quizzes, and tests. He’s actually learning how to study. I think he’ll be better served for high school than had we stayed in MCPS.

The question OP asked was whether mcps pushes kids. And quite frankly, they don’t.

A friend subbed at Silver Creek and would concur.

The issue with lax grading and retakes is system-wide; it is not confined to one school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just about wanting to avoid schools where the primary focus is on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level. The peer groups at the W schools are academically stronger and encourage each other to excel.

+1 this has been our experience. Add WJ to your list OP. Large ranges of homes, townhomes, condos, and apartment in zone.

My kids are both Blair graduates and had zero classes where the "primary focus (was) on getting kids up to grade level or in a position to graduate even if never at grade level." Both of my kids attended T30 colleges and are highly successful, independent adults now at 25 and 22.

DP and yeah, this example is yet another of people not understanding that there are sizable cohorts of above grade level kids at every single high school in MCPS. Smart kids will have peer groups. They're smaller at some schools than others, and variations in income level, but let's stop mistaking parental income for children's intelligence.

and at a HS of 3K students there's a fairly large high achieving cohort

And also a very large cohort of low achieving kids, up to no good kids, mad at the world kids. What we are talking about is the ratios of said cohorts between the different schools. I would wager there are more kids who are functionally illiterate at Blair than Magnet kids. And while there is some good and bad reasons for that related to economic realities and ESOL. Why not go somewhere where the good kid cohort is the vast majority opposed to a subgroup if you have the means . I am sure there are a few Blair families that could have gotten into a starter home IB for Whitman but every single family at Whitman could have sent their kids to Blair if they wanted to and gotten one of the nicest homes in the area in the process, 2mil goes a looooooong way in the east county. You will never convince me that concentration of high achievers in the West don't know a little bit more about what it takes to achieve than the concentration of average to low achieving families that are naturally IB in the east.

You’re getting a lot of heat for this post but I understand the point. Many schools have a cohort of kids on track to be successful. But the question is what’s the dominant culture of the school. If you have a kid who could go a variety of different directions then that is an important question.

No, you’re not getting it, either. You and PP, who clearly have zero experience with Blair/Einstein/Northwood/etc. think you know what these schools are like. You don’t. You’re assuming all kinds of things about these schools and the kids who attend them (and the families raising them) without actually knowing them.

Two 4s and a 3 on great schools I’m sure they are great for the group of kids who get pushed though if one can just ignore copious amounts kids failing through the crack or perform at grade level. Maybe the Middle class families have more in common with the W parents after all, both pretend that segment of society doesn’t exist but the DCC parents are just better at it because they can do it living next to them while their kids walk in the same halls. The W families just never have to see them.

'Cause everyone knows Great Schools is such a great system!

[Anonymous]

I would take the more grounded DCC schools over ones like Whitman or BCC. One can find a sizable high-achieving cohort at any MCPS school. Sure, one may have 5 sections of AP English while the other only has 3, but who cares.

Schools like Whitman and BCC are known for having both drug culture and racial issues. I think there was even a kid with a knife running around the parking lot a few months ago. Not to mention all the racial incidents that plague these schools like the N*word cards or kids in blackface.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would take the more grounded DCC schools over ones like Whitman or BCC. One can find a sizable high-achieving cohort at any MCPS school. Sure, one may have 5 sections of AP English while the other only has 3, but who cares.

Schools like Whitman and BCC are known for having both drug culture and racial issues. I think there was even a kid with a knife running around the parking lot a few months ago. Not to mention all the racial incidents that plague these schools like the N*word cards or kids in blackface.

Almost half of the high schools in MCPS, including many of the DCC schools, couldn’t produce a single NMSF this year, so the idea that they all have sizable high-achieving cohorts is laughable. They have small cohorts of above-average kids and large cohorts of below-average kids and kids who may be bright but are below grade level due to their limited education before arriving in this country. Who do you think gets the lion’s share of the attention at those schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would take the more grounded DCC schools over ones like Whitman or BCC. One can find a sizable high-achieving cohort at any MCPS school. Sure, one may have 5 sections of AP English while the other only has 3, but who cares.

Schools like Whitman and BCC are known for having both drug culture and racial issues. I think there was even a kid with a knife running around the parking lot a few months ago. Not to mention all the racial incidents that plague these schools like the N*word cards or kids in blackface.

Almost half of the high schools in MCPS, including many of the DCC schools, couldn’t produce a single NMSF this year, so the idea that they all have sizable high-achieving cohorts is laughable. They have small cohorts of above-average kids and large cohorts of below-average kids and kids who may be bright but are below grade level due to their limited education before arriving in this country. Who do you think gets the lion’s share of the attention at those schools?

What's laughable is your fixation on NMSF as a measure of school desirability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would take the more grounded DCC schools over ones like Whitman or BCC. One can find a sizable high-achieving cohort at any MCPS school. Sure, one may have 5 sections of AP English while the other only has 3, but who cares.

Schools like Whitman and BCC are known for having both drug culture and racial issues. I think there was even a kid with a knife running around the parking lot a few months ago. Not to mention all the racial incidents that plague these schools like the N*word cards or kids in blackface.

Almost half of the high schools in MCPS, including many of the DCC schools, couldn’t produce a single NMSF this year, so the idea that they all have sizable high-achieving cohorts is laughable. They have small cohorts of above-average kids and large cohorts of below-average kids and kids who may be bright but are below grade level due to their limited education before arriving in this country. Who do you think gets the lion’s share of the attention at those schools?

What's laughable is your fixation on NMSF as a measure of school desirability.

It’s one metric. What’s laughable is the suggestion that mediocre schools are “grounded” when they are actually just weighted down.

[Anonymous]

I'll never understand why some people feel the need to opine about schools with which they clearly have no experience or connection. If OP is still around, I'm sure they would be better helped by people sharing what they actually know about schools their children have attended.