Gifted & talented programs and magnet school opportunities in the public schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As predicted, OP's question has become yet another debate on expanding the magnets, so I may as well weigh in.

I think expanding access to the HS magnets is a good thing, EVEN IF it means some incremental drop in "rigor" in the formerly county-wide magnets.

Right now, MCPS has an approach that seeks to max out the potential of a handful of kids while leaving the rest with almost no access to differentiated or enriched instruction until 11th grade.

This is the wrong approach for a public school system, particularly one with as many high achievers as MCPS has.

There's no denying that expanding access from the "top" 1% to the "top" 5% will make some sort of a difference, but not a meaningful one and certainly not one that should stop MCPS from expanding the programs.

I agree more access is needed. But why can’t MCPS preserve a well established program and allow top 1% continue to access it while having other top 5% programs. It’s a mistake to kill these nationally recognized successful programs just for equity. Many people chose to live in Montgomery county due to these programs.

We don't know that any programs will be "killed."

Limiting access to only a few schools is essentially killing the program. In a few years, they won’t be able to compete at the state or national level, the very competitions that built their reputation. With the top 1% of students spread across six regions, it’s possible that none of the MCPS magnet programs will be able to compete with FCPS, or even HCPS in the future.

Did it kill the program when Blair stopped being countywide when Poolesville's program opened? No.

But Nicky Hazel said (see a previous thread) that they will make Blair, Poolesville and RMIB opening to its own regional HSs once the regional model is passed. This basically means the end of these prestigious programs.

PP's point (which I agree with) was that Blair used to be whole-of-county, and then they reduced the attendance zone by opening Poolesville.

Did that kill the program?

Again having students from 16 high schools or 25 high schools may not make a difference. But reducing significantly to 5 schools is going to kill the program.

It would be useful here to differentiate between "kill" and "change."

If we limit ourselves to the programs that DCUM perceives as the "best," we have Blair Magnet, Poolesville Magnet, and RMIB. I don't actually think those are the only good programs in MCPS, but let's just play along for a second.

Right now, the two SMCS programs are in either the far Eastern part of the county, or the far Northern part. That's interesting and important, because it means we cannot assume the current complement of applicants/acceptances is the full universe of capable kids. It's entirely possible that the number of capable kids is far higher, but geography is currently keeping them from applying/accepting.

I suppose it is "possible." Anything is "possible" right? But you don't change what's working (programs with known results) because you think something is "possible"... Build it and they will come is not the right way to run the school system, don't you agree? Has the school system done a complete systematic evaluation over the years to prove the need (i.e., the number of RMIB, Blair, and PHS magnet caliber kids) FAR outnumbered magnet seats currently available? I think not.

- dp

Eh, let's move forward as a county with a system that will serve more kids. What's past is past and we can build something better for the future. The consistent argument on this thread seems to be that MCPS might stop offering a specific math class that no more than 20 kids per year out of 200,000 in the county take per year. That's a fine trade-off to me, and to the vast majority of families in this school district.

+1 how is this even an argument

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As predicted, OP's question has become yet another debate on expanding the magnets, so I may as well weigh in.

I think expanding access to the HS magnets is a good thing, EVEN IF it means some incremental drop in "rigor" in the formerly county-wide magnets.

Right now, MCPS has an approach that seeks to max out the potential of a handful of kids while leaving the rest with almost no access to differentiated or enriched instruction until 11th grade.

This is the wrong approach for a public school system, particularly one with as many high achievers as MCPS has.

There's no denying that expanding access from the "top" 1% to the "top" 5% will make some sort of a difference, but not a meaningful one and certainly not one that should stop MCPS from expanding the programs.

Disagree. top 1% operates on a different level to top 5%.

I have one of each. They don't operate the same academically.

This +1. I have one of each. Totally different level of mental and academic needs. We should sacrifice one for another. MCPS earns its national reputation and attractiveness by serving the top 1% well. It can and should keep the successful model while expand some courses to regional models.

As I mentioned previously, half of the Blair magnet courses can only enroll 10~20 students per year because they are so challenging, but every year there are always 10-20 kids that find these courses engaging, fun and learning (not the same 10-20 kids, a lot of them finds what they want to do as early as middle school age and dedicated to take all courses possible at one specific major). Regional model will not have capacity to open these courses nor have enough students register, so these courses will disappear permanently if county-wide program is canceled.

Can't they just teach at least some of those classes virtually so kids from different regional programs can take them together?

I'm guessing there are probably a couple that you'd have to be doing hands-on stuff in person, but once you're down to losing a couple classes for a few dozen kids, is it really that big a deal? What classes would they even be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As predicted, OP's question has become yet another debate on expanding the magnets, so I may as well weigh in.

I think expanding access to the HS magnets is a good thing, EVEN IF it means some incremental drop in "rigor" in the formerly county-wide magnets.

Right now, MCPS has an approach that seeks to max out the potential of a handful of kids while leaving the rest with almost no access to differentiated or enriched instruction until 11th grade.

This is the wrong approach for a public school system, particularly one with as many high achievers as MCPS has.

There's no denying that expanding access from the "top" 1% to the "top" 5% will make some sort of a difference, but not a meaningful one and certainly not one that should stop MCPS from expanding the programs.

I agree more access is needed. But why can’t MCPS preserve a well established program and allow top 1% continue to access it while having other top 5% programs. It’s a mistake to kill these nationally recognized successful programs just for equity. Many people chose to live in Montgomery county due to these programs.

If we are going to make an economic/real estate argument, it makes FAR more sense to expand the magnets than to assume that people are moving here on the off chance that their child will be one of the 200 kids per year who get into these "well-established programs."

But you forget people have choices. When MCPS has worse reputation than FCPS or HCPS, why would they want to come to MCPS? Think about prince george county which has easy commute to DC but people do not prefer to move there.

Sounds like you should support increased taxation to serve both those needing general advancement/differentiation and those needing radically advanced coursework.

And, of course, support the same to achieve the best means of identifying (early) the ability that might require that far more differentiated program (rather than those who simply test well from prep, not that there isn't overlap between the two groups), ensuring that it is nurtured with public funding so that these programs remain truly accessible across economic circumstance.

For those pointing to Fairfax/TJ, why should we think that there are not a proportionate number of MoCo students that would show need for this kind of program? There would be more than twice the number currently admitted across both SMCS sites. And that's with TJ clearly oversibscribed. One could point to the fact that Blair SMCS has even higher-level offerings than those at TJ, but there is the liklihood that among any hundred admitted there would be enough who would rise with the offered curriculum to support at least single sections of those courses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As predicted, OP's question has become yet another debate on expanding the magnets, so I may as well weigh in.

I think expanding access to the HS magnets is a good thing, EVEN IF it means some incremental drop in "rigor" in the formerly county-wide magnets.

Right now, MCPS has an approach that seeks to max out the potential of a handful of kids while leaving the rest with almost no access to differentiated or enriched instruction until 11th grade.

This is the wrong approach for a public school system, particularly one with as many high achievers as MCPS has.

There's no denying that expanding access from the "top" 1% to the "top" 5% will make some sort of a difference, but not a meaningful one and certainly not one that should stop MCPS from expanding the programs.

I agree more access is needed. But why can’t MCPS preserve a well established program and allow top 1% continue to access it while having other top 5% programs. It’s a mistake to kill these nationally recognized successful programs just for equity. Many people chose to live in Montgomery county due to these programs.

If we are going to make an economic/real estate argument, it makes FAR more sense to expand the magnets than to assume that people are moving here on the off chance that their child will be one of the 200 kids per year who get into these "well-established programs."

But you forget people have choices. When MCPS has worse reputation than FCPS or HCPS, why would they want to come to MCPS? Think about prince george county which has easy commute to DC but people do not prefer to move there.

Sounds like you should support increased taxation to serve both those needing general advancement/differentiation and those needing radically advanced coursework.

And, of course, support the same to achieve the best means of identifying (early) the ability that might require that far more differentiated program (rather than those who simply test well from prep, not that there isn't overlap between the two groups), ensuring that it is nurtured with public funding so that these programs remain truly accessible across economic circumstance.

For those pointing to Fairfax/TJ, why should we think that there are not a proportionate number of MoCo students that would show need for this kind of program? There would be more than twice the number currently admitted across both SMCS sites. And that's with TJ clearly oversibscribed. One could point to the fact that Blair SMCS has even higher-level offerings than those at TJ, but there is the liklihood that among any hundred admitted there would be enough who would rise with the offered curriculum to support at least single sections of those courses.

Does Fairfax county tax more than Montgomery county? No. Instead of increasing taxes, we need to focus on fiscal responsibility and reduce wasteful spending MCPS currently has with such bloated central office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As predicted, OP's question has become yet another debate on expanding the magnets, so I may as well weigh in.

I think expanding access to the HS magnets is a good thing, EVEN IF it means some incremental drop in "rigor" in the formerly county-wide magnets.

Right now, MCPS has an approach that seeks to max out the potential of a handful of kids while leaving the rest with almost no access to differentiated or enriched instruction until 11th grade.

This is the wrong approach for a public school system, particularly one with as many high achievers as MCPS has.

There's no denying that expanding access from the "top" 1% to the "top" 5% will make some sort of a difference, but not a meaningful one and certainly not one that should stop MCPS from expanding the programs.

I agree more access is needed. But why can’t MCPS preserve a well established program and allow top 1% continue to access it while having other top 5% programs. It’s a mistake to kill these nationally recognized successful programs just for equity. Many people chose to live in Montgomery county due to these programs.

We don't know that any programs will be "killed."

Limiting access to only a few schools is essentially killing the program. In a few years, they won’t be able to compete at the state or national level, the very competitions that built their reputation. With the top 1% of students spread across six regions, it’s possible that none of the MCPS magnet programs will be able to compete with FCPS, or even HCPS in the future.

Did it kill the program when Blair stopped being countywide when Poolesville's program opened? No.

But Nicky Hazel said (see a previous thread) that they will make Blair, Poolesville and RMIB opening to its own regional HSs once the regional model is passed. This basically means the end of these prestigious programs.

PP's point (which I agree with) was that Blair used to be whole-of-county, and then they reduced the attendance zone by opening Poolesville.

Did that kill the program?

Again having students from 16 high schools or 25 high schools may not make a difference. But reducing significantly to 5 schools is going to kill the program.

It would be useful here to differentiate between "kill" and "change."

If we limit ourselves to the programs that DCUM perceives as the "best," we have Blair Magnet, Poolesville Magnet, and RMIB. I don't actually think those are the only good programs in MCPS, but let's just play along for a second.

Right now, the two SMCS programs are in either the far Eastern part of the county, or the far Northern part. That's interesting and important, because it means we cannot assume the current complement of applicants/acceptances is the full universe of capable kids. It's entirely possible that the number of capable kids is far higher, but geography is currently keeping them from applying/accepting.

I suppose it is "possible." Anything is "possible" right? But you don't change what's working (programs with known results) because you think something is "possible"... Build it and they will come is not the right way to run the school system, don't you agree? Has the school system done a complete systematic evaluation over the years to prove the need (i.e., the number of RMIB, Blair, and PHS magnet caliber kids) FAR outnumbered magnet seats currently available? I think not.

- dp

Eh, let's move forward as a county with a system that will serve more kids. What's past is past and we can build something better for the future. The consistent argument on this thread seems to be that MCPS might stop offering a specific math class that no more than 20 kids per year out of 200,000 in the county take per year. That's a fine trade-off to me, and to the vast majority of families in this school district.

Are you arguing for greater equity and access?

[Anonymous]

OK, there are 12,000 kids per grade in MCPS roughly.

Let's take the top 1% of kids - that's 120. Top 5% is 600 kids.

Our current Poolesville/Blair/RM seats allow for about half those kids to be in a special program.

The missing piece of information is how many of those kids WANT to be in a special program but can't go because of geography/transportation?

Then, what percentage of the population should we be contorting ourselves to provide special programs for? Is it 1, 5, or 10% What about a motivated 11th% kid?

What we really need to do is strengthen every high school to have a portfolio of advanced classes so the top 10-15% are challenged there (in a high school of 2500 kids, that would be 62-75 kids per grade - that's enough for multiple sections).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As predicted, OP's question has become yet another debate on expanding the magnets, so I may as well weigh in.

I think expanding access to the HS magnets is a good thing, EVEN IF it means some incremental drop in "rigor" in the formerly county-wide magnets.

Right now, MCPS has an approach that seeks to max out the potential of a handful of kids while leaving the rest with almost no access to differentiated or enriched instruction until 11th grade.

This is the wrong approach for a public school system, particularly one with as many high achievers as MCPS has.

There's no denying that expanding access from the "top" 1% to the "top" 5% will make some sort of a difference, but not a meaningful one and certainly not one that should stop MCPS from expanding the programs.

I agree more access is needed. But why can’t MCPS preserve a well established program and allow top 1% continue to access it while having other top 5% programs. It’s a mistake to kill these nationally recognized successful programs just for equity. Many people chose to live in Montgomery county due to these programs.

If we are going to make an economic/real estate argument, it makes FAR more sense to expand the magnets than to assume that people are moving here on the off chance that their child will be one of the 200 kids per year who get into these "well-established programs."

But you forget people have choices. When MCPS has worse reputation than FCPS or HCPS, why would they want to come to MCPS? Think about prince george county which has easy commute to DC but people do not prefer to move there.

Sounds like you should support increased taxation to serve both those needing general advancement/differentiation and those needing radically advanced coursework.

And, of course, support the same to achieve the best means of identifying (early) the ability that might require that far more differentiated program (rather than those who simply test well from prep, not that there isn't overlap between the two groups), ensuring that it is nurtured with public funding so that these programs remain truly accessible across economic circumstance.

For those pointing to Fairfax/TJ, why should we think that there are not a proportionate number of MoCo students that would show need for this kind of program? There would be more than twice the number currently admitted across both SMCS sites. And that's with TJ clearly oversibscribed. One could point to the fact that Blair SMCS has even higher-level offerings than those at TJ, but there is the liklihood that among any hundred admitted there would be enough who would rise with the offered curriculum to support at least single sections of those courses.

Does Fairfax county tax more than Montgomery county? No. Instead of increasing taxes, we need to focus on fiscal responsibility and reduce wasteful spending MCPS currently has with such bloated central office.

That's been debunked. Fairfax County's per-student operational spend is all of three quarters of a percent lower than MoCo's. The "bloated central office" comparison comes from the difference in the way FCPS has categorized many centrally-managed staff with roughly equivalent functions as those at at MCPS as school-based.

Each system could improve management to control costs. MoCo's higher tax rate, though, has much more to do with non-education-oriented spending, giveaways, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK, there are 12,000 kids per grade in MCPS roughly.

Let's take the top 1% of kids - that's 120. Top 5% is 600 kids.

Our current Poolesville/Blair/RM seats allow for about half those kids to be in a special program.

The missing piece of information is how many of those kids WANT to be in a special program but can't go because of geography/transportation?

Then, what percentage of the population should we be contorting ourselves to provide special programs for? Is it 1, 5, or 10% What about a motivated 11th% kid?

What we really need to do is strengthen every high school to have a portfolio of advanced classes so the top 10-15% are challenged there (in a high school of 2500 kids, that would be 62-75 kids per grade - that's enough for multiple sections).

Not every high performer wants a mscs magnet so the county is serving a greater percentage of those who do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As predicted, OP's question has become yet another debate on expanding the magnets, so I may as well weigh in.

I think expanding access to the HS magnets is a good thing, EVEN IF it means some incremental drop in "rigor" in the formerly county-wide magnets.

Right now, MCPS has an approach that seeks to max out the potential of a handful of kids while leaving the rest with almost no access to differentiated or enriched instruction until 11th grade.

This is the wrong approach for a public school system, particularly one with as many high achievers as MCPS has.

There's no denying that expanding access from the "top" 1% to the "top" 5% will make some sort of a difference, but not a meaningful one and certainly not one that should stop MCPS from expanding the programs.

Disagree. top 1% operates on a different level to top 5%.

I have one of each. They don't operate the same academically.

This +1. I have one of each. Totally different level of mental and academic needs. We should sacrifice one for another. MCPS earns its national reputation and attractiveness by serving the top 1% well. It can and should keep the successful model while expand some courses to regional models.

As I mentioned previously, half of the Blair magnet courses can only enroll 10~20 students per year because they are so challenging, but every year there are always 10-20 kids that find these courses engaging, fun and learning (not the same 10-20 kids, a lot of them finds what they want to do as early as middle school age and dedicated to take all courses possible at one specific major). Regional model will not have capacity to open these courses nor have enough students register, so these courses will disappear permanently if county-wide program is canceled.

Can't they just teach at least some of those classes virtually so kids from different regional programs can take them together?

I'm guessing there are probably a couple that you'd have to be doing hands-on stuff in person, but once you're down to losing a couple classes for a few dozen kids, is it really that big a deal? What classes would they even be?

They could but they refuse. Not only does MCPS refuse but they shut down the virtual school. They only run compacted math, which makes no sense virtually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK, there are 12,000 kids per grade in MCPS roughly.

Let's take the top 1% of kids - that's 120. Top 5% is 600 kids.

Our current Poolesville/Blair/RM seats allow for about half those kids to be in a special program.

The missing piece of information is how many of those kids WANT to be in a special program but can't go because of geography/transportation?

Then, what percentage of the population should we be contorting ourselves to provide special programs for? Is it 1, 5, or 10% What about a motivated 11th% kid?

What we really need to do is strengthen every high school to have a portfolio of advanced classes so the top 10-15% are challenged there (in a high school of 2500 kids, that would be 62-75 kids per grade - that's enough for multiple sections).

What happens to those kids? They go without what they need. Our school has few advanced classes. The principal despite lobbying by parents and students refuses to add them. We have qualified teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As predicted, OP's question has become yet another debate on expanding the magnets, so I may as well weigh in.

I think expanding access to the HS magnets is a good thing, EVEN IF it means some incremental drop in "rigor" in the formerly county-wide magnets.

Right now, MCPS has an approach that seeks to max out the potential of a handful of kids while leaving the rest with almost no access to differentiated or enriched instruction until 11th grade.

This is the wrong approach for a public school system, particularly one with as many high achievers as MCPS has.

There's no denying that expanding access from the "top" 1% to the "top" 5% will make some sort of a difference, but not a meaningful one and certainly not one that should stop MCPS from expanding the programs.

I agree more access is needed. But why can’t MCPS preserve a well established program and allow top 1% continue to access it while having other top 5% programs. It’s a mistake to kill these nationally recognized successful programs just for equity. Many people chose to live in Montgomery county due to these programs.

We don't know that any programs will be "killed."

Limiting access to only a few schools is essentially killing the program. In a few years, they won’t be able to compete at the state or national level, the very competitions that built their reputation. With the top 1% of students spread across six regions, it’s possible that none of the MCPS magnet programs will be able to compete with FCPS, or even HCPS in the future.

Did it kill the program when Blair stopped being countywide when Poolesville's program opened? No.

But Nicky Hazel said (see a previous thread) that they will make Blair, Poolesville and RMIB opening to its own regional HSs once the regional model is passed. This basically means the end of these prestigious programs.

PP's point (which I agree with) was that Blair used to be whole-of-county, and then they reduced the attendance zone by opening Poolesville.

Did that kill the program?

Again having students from 16 high schools or 25 high schools may not make a difference. But reducing significantly to 5 schools is going to kill the program.

It would be useful here to differentiate between "kill" and "change."

If we limit ourselves to the programs that DCUM perceives as the "best," we have Blair Magnet, Poolesville Magnet, and RMIB. I don't actually think those are the only good programs in MCPS, but let's just play along for a second.

Right now, the two SMCS programs are in either the far Eastern part of the county, or the far Northern part. That's interesting and important, because it means we cannot assume the current complement of applicants/acceptances is the full universe of capable kids. It's entirely possible that the number of capable kids is far higher, but geography is currently keeping them from applying/accepting.

I suppose it is "possible." Anything is "possible" right? But you don't change what's working (programs with known results) because you think something is "possible"... Build it and they will come is not the right way to run the school system, don't you agree? Has the school system done a complete systematic evaluation over the years to prove the need (i.e., the number of RMIB, Blair, and PHS magnet caliber kids) FAR outnumbered magnet seats currently available? I think not.

- dp

Eh, let's move forward as a county with a system that will serve more kids. What's past is past and we can build something better for the future. The consistent argument on this thread seems to be that MCPS might stop offering a specific math class that no more than 20 kids per year out of 200,000 in the county take per year. That's a fine trade-off to me, and to the vast majority of families in this school district.

More students need and want advanced classes but only the W schools and BCC get them, which is why there is such a huge divide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As predicted, OP's question has become yet another debate on expanding the magnets, so I may as well weigh in.

I think expanding access to the HS magnets is a good thing, EVEN IF it means some incremental drop in "rigor" in the formerly county-wide magnets.

Right now, MCPS has an approach that seeks to max out the potential of a handful of kids while leaving the rest with almost no access to differentiated or enriched instruction until 11th grade.

This is the wrong approach for a public school system, particularly one with as many high achievers as MCPS has.

There's no denying that expanding access from the "top" 1% to the "top" 5% will make some sort of a difference, but not a meaningful one and certainly not one that should stop MCPS from expanding the programs.

Disagree. top 1% operates on a different level to top 5%.

I have one of each. They don't operate the same academically.

This +1. I have one of each. Totally different level of mental and academic needs. We should sacrifice one for another. MCPS earns its national reputation and attractiveness by serving the top 1% well. It can and should keep the successful model while expand some courses to regional models.

As I mentioned previously, half of the Blair magnet courses can only enroll 10~20 students per year because they are so challenging, but every year there are always 10-20 kids that find these courses engaging, fun and learning (not the same 10-20 kids, a lot of them finds what they want to do as early as middle school age and dedicated to take all courses possible at one specific major). Regional model will not have capacity to open these courses nor have enough students register, so these courses will disappear permanently if county-wide program is canceled.

Can't they just teach at least some of those classes virtually so kids from different regional programs can take them together?

I'm guessing there are probably a couple that you'd have to be doing hands-on stuff in person, but once you're down to losing a couple classes for a few dozen kids, is it really that big a deal? What classes would they even be?

They could but they refuse. Not only does MCPS refuse but they shut down the virtual school. They only run compacted math, which makes no sense virtually.

Virtual classes for students without a large enough cohort at their school is one element of this new still-forming plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As predicted, OP's question has become yet another debate on expanding the magnets, so I may as well weigh in.

I think expanding access to the HS magnets is a good thing, EVEN IF it means some incremental drop in "rigor" in the formerly county-wide magnets.

Right now, MCPS has an approach that seeks to max out the potential of a handful of kids while leaving the rest with almost no access to differentiated or enriched instruction until 11th grade.

This is the wrong approach for a public school system, particularly one with as many high achievers as MCPS has.

There's no denying that expanding access from the "top" 1% to the "top" 5% will make some sort of a difference, but not a meaningful one and certainly not one that should stop MCPS from expanding the programs.

Disagree. top 1% operates on a different level to top 5%.

I have one of each. They don't operate the same academically.

This +1. I have one of each. Totally different level of mental and academic needs. We should sacrifice one for another. MCPS earns its national reputation and attractiveness by serving the top 1% well. It can and should keep the successful model while expand some courses to regional models.

As I mentioned previously, half of the Blair magnet courses can only enroll 10~20 students per year because they are so challenging, but every year there are always 10-20 kids that find these courses engaging, fun and learning (not the same 10-20 kids, a lot of them finds what they want to do as early as middle school age and dedicated to take all courses possible at one specific major). Regional model will not have capacity to open these courses nor have enough students register, so these courses will disappear permanently if county-wide program is canceled.

Can't they just teach at least some of those classes virtually so kids from different regional programs can take them together?

I'm guessing there are probably a couple that you'd have to be doing hands-on stuff in person, but once you're down to losing a couple classes for a few dozen kids, is it really that big a deal? What classes would they even be?

You can find all Blair magnet classes online:
● Science & Engineering
○ Advanced Topics in Earth Science
○ Analysis of Equity and Identity in STEM
○ Analytical Chemistry
○ Astronomy
○ Biological Chemistry
○ Chemistry of Art
○ Cell Physiology
○ Entomology
○ Immunology
○ Introductory Genetic Analysis
○ Marine Biology
○ Materials Science
○ Mathematical Physics A/B (Coded as AP
Physics, but requires the completion of
Multivariable Calculus and Differential
Equations)
○ Neuroscience
○ Optics
○ Origins of Science
○ Organic Chemistry
○ Physical Chemistry
○ Robotics
○ Quantum Physics
○ Senior Research Project
○ Thermodynamics
● Computer Science
○ Analysis of Algorithms
○ Computational Methods
○ Computer Graphics (programming)
○ Computer Modeling & Simulation
○ Adv CS Programming 3B: Future of
Programming Languages
○ Introduction to Artificial Intelligence
○ Introduction to Networking (Cybersecurity)
○ Senior Research Project
○ Software Design
○ Adv CS Programming 3A: Video Game
Programming
● Mathematics
○ Advanced Geometry
○ Complex Analysis
○ Discrete Mathematics
○ Linear Algebra
○ Logic
○ Multivariable Calculus and Differential
Equations A/B
○ Senior Research Project
○ Senior Seminar in Statistical Research

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As predicted, OP's question has become yet another debate on expanding the magnets, so I may as well weigh in.

I think expanding access to the HS magnets is a good thing, EVEN IF it means some incremental drop in "rigor" in the formerly county-wide magnets.

Right now, MCPS has an approach that seeks to max out the potential of a handful of kids while leaving the rest with almost no access to differentiated or enriched instruction until 11th grade.

This is the wrong approach for a public school system, particularly one with as many high achievers as MCPS has.

There's no denying that expanding access from the "top" 1% to the "top" 5% will make some sort of a difference, but not a meaningful one and certainly not one that should stop MCPS from expanding the programs.

I agree more access is needed. But why can’t MCPS preserve a well established program and allow top 1% continue to access it while having other top 5% programs. It’s a mistake to kill these nationally recognized successful programs just for equity. Many people chose to live in Montgomery county due to these programs.

We don't know that any programs will be "killed."

Limiting access to only a few schools is essentially killing the program. In a few years, they won’t be able to compete at the state or national level, the very competitions that built their reputation. With the top 1% of students spread across six regions, it’s possible that none of the MCPS magnet programs will be able to compete with FCPS, or even HCPS in the future.

Actually, that's the reason MCPS is better than them, and dominating them in competitions. MCPS doesn't put all of its eggs in one basket, they're spread out. Reason why MCPS has lot more schools that can compete in competitions, while only TJ in FCPS can really compete.

[Anonymous]

If my child can't have it, your child can't have it either!