Size & placement of regional magnet programs set to decimate non-host, non-rich schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you add all the regional programs together, MCPS appears to be assuming that almost half of high school students will be in one of them. It's nuts

Is this true? There's no way this is actually what's going to happen.

30-75 per grade per program, on average each HS hosts 3 programs, so on average each HS has 30+60+75 = 165 students per grade enrolled in the regional program. For small HS like Einstein, it's about 33%. For large HS like Blair, it's about 21%.

When you have 20-30% students in magnets, it's not magnet anymore. It's honors for all.

That’s what they want - honors for all. Are kids going to leave a school like Whitman? No. Does that reduce open seats in the Whitman program or simply overcrowd Whitman?

[Anonymous]

I just need to insert some facts for the benefit of people who are reading here that “Einstein has no STEM.” They have AP Calc and Stats, and 2-year sequences of IB Chem, IB Bio, and IB Physics. My Einstein grad is thriving in engineering in college. Get some perspective here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just need to insert some facts for the benefit of people who are reading here that “Einstein has no STEM.” They have AP Calc and Stats, and 2-year sequences of IB Chem, IB Bio, and IB Physics. My Einstein grad is thriving in engineering in college. Get some perspective here.

Some kids would prefer more than that and two year sequences make it hard to take other classes. You need to get some perspective as not all kids want or nerf the same thing. Stem is more than math and science. IB is not equal in math. Some kids want engineering, computer science and more. Saying it was enough for my kid, so take what you get while other schools have much more is selfish. All our kids should have the same opportunities. Stem is very limited at Einstein. Einstein would be very disappointed. Wouldn’t it have been great if your engineering student had more access to engineering classes and ap physics which is a standard class for engineering?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you add all the regional programs together, MCPS appears to be assuming that almost half of high school students will be in one of them. It's nuts

Is this true? There's no way this is actually what's going to happen.

30-75 per grade per program, on average each HS hosts 3 programs, so on average each HS has 30+60+75 = 165 students per grade enrolled in the regional program. For small HS like Einstein, it's about 33%. For large HS like Blair, it's about 21%.

When you have 20-30% students in magnets, it's not magnet anymore. It's honors for all.

It can still be a magnet ad plenty of high achieving kids get waitlisted or turned down who are capable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just need to insert some facts for the benefit of people who are reading here that “Einstein has no STEM.” They have AP Calc and Stats, and 2-year sequences of IB Chem, IB Bio, and IB Physics. My Einstein grad is thriving in engineering in college. Get some perspective here.

Some kids would prefer more than that and two year sequences make it hard to take other classes. You need to get some perspective as not all kids want or nerf the same thing. Stem is more than math and science. IB is not equal in math. Some kids want engineering, computer science and more. Saying it was enough for my kid, so take what you get while other schools have much more is selfish. All our kids should have the same opportunities. Stem is very limited at Einstein. Einstein would be very disappointed. Wouldn’t it have been great if your engineering student had more access to engineering classes and ap physics which is a standard class for engineering?

NP - who are you to tell another parent what would have been great for their kid? Check your arrogance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It appears that MCPS is planning on 60 out-of-bounds students per grade for each of the three core academic criteria-based programs (SMCS, IB, and humanities.) if they draw roughly equally from each school, that would be around 45-60 high-achieving kids per grade leaving each school, or roughly 10-15% of the most advanced kids in each grade, which is a very big number. (And if some of the kids at rich schools with strong local offerings opt out, it'll be an even larger share of the kids at the other schools who leave ). Schools who host one of those programs will "receive" 60 advanced and motivated kids from out of bounds in return, of course, but those who don't won't.

The richest schools may be able to handle losing that many motivated kids interested in advanced classes (although none of them will have to because they all get one or more of these programs anyway), but it will be a real blow to most ordinary schools which don't have huge numbers of kids taking advanced classes to begin with. Sure, they may have a few bright kids coming to whatever other programs they're hosting, at least at the start, but if those schools can't field a reasonable number of challenging classes for those kids, loving the arts (or whatever) isn't going to be enough for a kid to choose that school over one where they can take advanced classes.

The list of schools that look likely to be hit by this appear to be: Einstein, Northwood, Blake, Paint Branch, Woodward, Rockville, Magruder, Quince Orchard, Clarksburg, Damascus, and Northwest.

Basically, it seems to me that there are two pathways here: 1) almost half of MCPS schools are seriously harmed by losing a large chunk of top students to attractive academic programs at other schools; and/or 2) the regional pathways are such a disaster that no one wants to leave and so local schools are safe. (Or, frankly, it could be a combination of the two, which could be even worse for some schools-- if a program in your region is successful and draws top kids from your school, while the programs at your school are a flop and don't draw many kids in, you're even worse off.)

Am I wrong here, or is this what other folks think too?

Add Blair to this list. Wootton and Churchill cluster area students comprise the greatest numbers in the SCSM magnet. Those students will no longer be eligible to attend Blair. Blair academic outcomes will decrease. It will have to be~2900 students in 3027. That number will begin to increase post-Trump when immigrants again feel safe coming to this country looking for economic opportunity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you add all the regional programs together, MCPS appears to be assuming that almost half of high school students will be in one of them. It's nuts

Is this true? There's no way this is actually what's going to happen.

30-75 per grade per program, on average each HS hosts 3 programs, so on average each HS has 30+60+75 = 165 students per grade enrolled in the regional program. For small HS like Einstein, it's about 33%. For large HS like Blair, it's about 21%.

When you have 20-30% students in magnets, it's not magnet anymore. It's honors for all.

I think you need to separate the criteria and interest based programs to get a more useful percentage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you add all the regional programs together, MCPS appears to be assuming that almost half of high school students will be in one of them. It's nuts

Is this true? There's no way this is actually what's going to happen.

30-75 per grade per program, on average each HS hosts 3 programs, so on average each HS has 30+60+75 = 165 students per grade enrolled in the regional program. For small HS like Einstein, it's about 33%. For large HS like Blair, it's about 21%.

When you have 20-30% students in magnets, it's not magnet anymore. It's honors for all.

According to this document, they are assuming 13,000 kids traveling to regional programs, and 21,000 total kids in regional programs when you add in local kids who are in programs at their home high school, in 2031-2032 when this is fully rolled out. There's only like 47,000 kids in current grades 4-7 who'll be in HS then (in reality it will probably be less as some drop out.) So they are assuming 28% of kids will travel to a regional program and 45% of kids will be enrolled in a regional program. (None of this is based on the regional programs being particularly large-- it's just that there's so darn many of them that even with relatively small program sizes, it adds up quickly.)

https://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DNLJXC4F4A19/$file/Regional%20Program%20Model%20FY2027-2031%20Budget%20251120.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just need to insert some facts for the benefit of people who are reading here that “Einstein has no STEM.” They have AP Calc and Stats, and 2-year sequences of IB Chem, IB Bio, and IB Physics. My Einstein grad is thriving in engineering in college. Get some perspective here.

Some kids would prefer more than that and two year sequences make it hard to take other classes. You need to get some perspective as not all kids want or nerf the same thing. Stem is more than math and science. IB is not equal in math. Some kids want engineering, computer science and more. Saying it was enough for my kid, so take what you get while other schools have much more is selfish. All our kids should have the same opportunities. Stem is very limited at Einstein. Einstein would be very disappointed. Wouldn’t it have been great if your engineering student had more access to engineering classes and ap physics which is a standard class for engineering?

NP - who are you to tell another parent what would have been great for their kid? Check your arrogance.

DP. Pot, meet kettle.

Put aside, for the moment, the post's response to the prior PP's offered personal anecdote about their engineering student, which pretty clearly was meant to elucidate a difference that the prior PP did not mention. Is there something about the post's explicitly stated central idea, "All our kids should have the same opportunities," with which you disagree? Are you suggesting that other parents should be OK with offerings at other schools being broader and at higher levels than at the school their child is assigned to attend?

Before retreating to a position of putting forth a list of advanced options/experiences at Einstein, even if being sure not to include those of past years which may no longer be offered, as evidence of equitability, please evaluate that in light of the options available at B-CC, a non-magnet IB school in the same school system right next door.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just need to insert some facts for the benefit of people who are reading here that “Einstein has no STEM.” They have AP Calc and Stats, and 2-year sequences of IB Chem, IB Bio, and IB Physics. My Einstein grad is thriving in engineering in college. Get some perspective here.

Some kids would prefer more than that and two year sequences make it hard to take other classes. You need to get some perspective as not all kids want or nerf the same thing. Stem is more than math and science. IB is not equal in math. Some kids want engineering, computer science and more. Saying it was enough for my kid, so take what you get while other schools have much more is selfish. All our kids should have the same opportunities. Stem is very limited at Einstein. Einstein would be very disappointed. Wouldn’t it have been great if your engineering student had more access to engineering classes and ap physics which is a standard class for engineering?

NP - who are you to tell another parent what would have been great for their kid? Check your arrogance.

DP. Pot, meet kettle.

Put aside, for the moment, the post's response to the prior PP's offered personal anecdote about their engineering student, which pretty clearly was meant to elucidate a difference that the prior PP did not mention. Is there something about the post's explicitly stated central idea, "All our kids should have the same opportunities," with which you disagree? Are you suggesting that other parents should be OK with offerings at other schools being broader and at higher levels than at the school their child is assigned to attend?

Before retreating to a position of putting forth a list of advanced options/experiences at Einstein, even if being sure not to include those of past years which may no longer be offered, as evidence of equitability, please evaluate that in light of the options available at B-CC, a non-magnet IB school in the same school system right next door.

There was a lot more offered under the previous principal. Each year, more and more is removed from Einstein. BCC is a good example to compare as they have IB and AP options and there is no reason not to offer both. People whose kids graduated a few years ago are not keeping up with the current offerings (or lack there of).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you add all the regional programs together, MCPS appears to be assuming that almost half of high school students will be in one of them. It's nuts

Is this true? There's no way this is actually what's going to happen.

30-75 per grade per program, on average each HS hosts 3 programs, so on average each HS has 30+60+75 = 165 students per grade enrolled in the regional program. For small HS like Einstein, it's about 33%. For large HS like Blair, it's about 21%.

When you have 20-30% students in magnets, it's not magnet anymore. It's honors for all.

According to this document, they are assuming 13,000 kids traveling to regional programs, and 21,000 total kids in regional programs when you add in local kids who are in programs at their home high school, in 2031-2032 when this is fully rolled out. There's only like 47,000 kids in current grades 4-7 who'll be in HS then (in reality it will probably be less as some drop out.) So they are assuming 28% of kids will travel to a regional program and 45% of kids will be enrolled in a regional program. (None of this is based on the regional programs being particularly large-- it's just that there's so darn many of them that even with relatively small program sizes, it adds up quickly.)

https://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DNLJXC4F4A19/$file/Regional%20Program%20Model%20FY2027-2031%20Budget%20251120.pdf

I don't expect many to attend regional schools, especially given distance and transportation issues. And, the lack of spots. How many spots per 9th-grade class are they really going to open up when most won't leave Whitman, for example? Even if there is a bus to/from school, that doesn't take into account after school activities and sports, and many parents cannot make that trip 2 a day, and some don't have cars. Public transporation isn't really a good choice as it could take 2 hours back and forth with multiple transfers on bus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you add all the regional programs together, MCPS appears to be assuming that almost half of high school students will be in one of them. It's nuts

Is this true? There's no way this is actually what's going to happen.

30-75 per grade per program, on average each HS hosts 3 programs, so on average each HS has 30+60+75 = 165 students per grade enrolled in the regional program. For small HS like Einstein, it's about 33%. For large HS like Blair, it's about 21%.

When you have 20-30% students in magnets, it's not magnet anymore. It's honors for all.

I think you need to separate the criteria and interest based programs to get a more useful percentage.

This, but many of the interest-based are going to fail as there is no interest and MCPS did not poll families on what their kids may want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It appears that MCPS is planning on 60 out-of-bounds students per grade for each of the three core academic criteria-based programs (SMCS, IB, and humanities.) if they draw roughly equally from each school, that would be around 45-60 high-achieving kids per grade leaving each school, or roughly 10-15% of the most advanced kids in each grade, which is a very big number. (And if some of the kids at rich schools with strong local offerings opt out, it'll be an even larger share of the kids at the other schools who leave ). Schools who host one of those programs will "receive" 60 advanced and motivated kids from out of bounds in return, of course, but those who don't won't.

The richest schools may be able to handle losing that many motivated kids interested in advanced classes (although none of them will have to because they all get one or more of these programs anyway), but it will be a real blow to most ordinary schools which don't have huge numbers of kids taking advanced classes to begin with. Sure, they may have a few bright kids coming to whatever other programs they're hosting, at least at the start, but if those schools can't field a reasonable number of challenging classes for those kids, loving the arts (or whatever) isn't going to be enough for a kid to choose that school over one where they can take advanced classes.

The list of schools that look likely to be hit by this appear to be: Einstein, Northwood, Blake, Paint Branch, Woodward, Rockville, Magruder, Quince Orchard, Clarksburg, Damascus, and Northwest.

Basically, it seems to me that there are two pathways here: 1) almost half of MCPS schools are seriously harmed by losing a large chunk of top students to attractive academic programs at other schools; and/or 2) the regional pathways are such a disaster that no one wants to leave and so local schools are safe. (Or, frankly, it could be a combination of the two, which could be even worse for some schools-- if a program in your region is successful and draws top kids from your school, while the programs at your school are a flop and don't draw many kids in, you're even worse off.)

Am I wrong here, or is this what other folks think too?

Add Blair to this list. Wootton and Churchill cluster area students comprise the greatest numbers in the SCSM magnet. Those students will no longer be eligible to attend Blair. Blair academic outcomes will decrease. It will have to be~2900 students in 3027. That number will begin to increase post-Trump when immigrants again feel safe coming to this country looking for economic opportunity.

Wootton and Churchill students will be fine, as there are a huge number of course offerings. It's the other kids who will be left behind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just need to insert some facts for the benefit of people who are reading here that “Einstein has no STEM.” They have AP Calc and Stats, and 2-year sequences of IB Chem, IB Bio, and IB Physics. My Einstein grad is thriving in engineering in college. Get some perspective here.

Some kids would prefer more than that and two year sequences make it hard to take other classes. You need to get some perspective as not all kids want or nerf the same thing. Stem is more than math and science. IB is not equal in math. Some kids want engineering, computer science and more. Saying it was enough for my kid, so take what you get while other schools have much more is selfish. All our kids should have the same opportunities. Stem is very limited at Einstein. Einstein would be very disappointed. Wouldn’t it have been great if your engineering student had more access to engineering classes and ap physics which is a standard class for engineering?

NP - who are you to tell another parent what would have been great for their kid? Check your arrogance.

Sure, it can be great, but it makes students less competitive without the classes and clubs, and this year, Einstein college acceptances are ok, but most of the smarter kids leave for other DCC schools and have far more of an advantage with college acceptances. Its also important to get a good foundation prior to college, and they cannot get that without the course offerings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just need to insert some facts for the benefit of people who are reading here that “Einstein has no STEM.” They have AP Calc and Stats, and 2-year sequences of IB Chem, IB Bio, and IB Physics. My Einstein grad is thriving in engineering in college. Get some perspective here.

Some kids would prefer more than that and two year sequences make it hard to take other classes. You need to get some perspective as not all kids want or nerf the same thing. Stem is more than math and science. IB is not equal in math. Some kids want engineering, computer science and more. Saying it was enough for my kid, so take what you get while other schools have much more is selfish. All our kids should have the same opportunities. Stem is very limited at Einstein. Einstein would be very disappointed. Wouldn’t it have been great if your engineering student had more access to engineering classes and ap physics which is a standard class for engineering?

No actually he was psyched for two years of IB physics. You sure have got a bee in your bonnet.