MCPS to end areawide Blair Magnet and countywide Richard Montgomery's IB program

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand the huge focus on Blair and Magnet Programs. They are fine but they should have limited catchment areas. W schools have advanced classes so Blair should be for the DCC only. I cannot figure out whey you'd go cross county for it when you have so many opportunities at your home school. Its also a highly specialized program and not that great if you don't like the specific classes.

Blair offers more than just advanced math classes compared to W schools. But, yes, lots of students want that highly specialized STEM magnet program. That's why there are lots of applicants for few spots.

Some of us just apply to apply with no intention of going.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of ya'll really need to settle down. Great teachers exist outside of the magnet programs. One of my kids not at a magnet Algebra teacher had a masters in math from John Hopkins. My other kid's MS math teacher (different school) was certified to teach math at the MS and HS level and was finishing up an Education Leadership doctorate.

Some teach a schools that are closer to where they live, others want to influence a certain demographic, and others are just happy at their school.

Will there likely need to be some hiring and training, sure, but if they finalize things in short order, like by February, they will have at least a whole year to get that done. Heck they could make it part of the recruiting strategy now.

No one said we don't have some great teachers, but some people want advanced math in *every* HS. Finding good teachers to teach really advanced math for every HS is going to be very difficult to find, not to mention the fact that in some schools there won't be enough demand for such classes to fill the classroom. Not good use of taxpayer $.

They only need one teacher for anything past bc. We have several teachers who could teach it. You just need Mv and linear algebra at every school. So, that’s two extra classes beyond what is provided now.

That is never going to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of ya'll really need to settle down. Great teachers exist outside of the magnet programs. One of my kids not at a magnet Algebra teacher had a masters in math from John Hopkins. My other kid's MS math teacher (different school) was certified to teach math at the MS and HS level and was finishing up an Education Leadership doctorate.

Some teach a schools that are closer to where they live, others want to influence a certain demographic, and others are just happy at their school.

Will there likely need to be some hiring and training, sure, but if they finalize things in short order, like by February, they will have at least a whole year to get that done. Heck they could make it part of the recruiting strategy now.

No one said we don't have some great teachers, but some people want advanced math in *every* HS. Finding good teachers to teach really advanced math for every HS is going to be very difficult to find, not to mention the fact that in some schools there won't be enough demand for such classes to fill the classroom. Not good use of taxpayer $.

They only need one teacher for anything past bc. We have several teachers who could teach it. You just need Mv and linear algebra at every school. So, that’s two extra classes beyond what is provided now.

Not true... At Blair, math classes include Logic, Discrete Mathematics, Advanced Geometry, Origins of Math, Complex Analysis (This is the course after MV calc and Lin Alg), and an Advanced Statistics Class (not to be confused with AP Stats). Similar things hold for science classes. As you can clearly see, it will be impossible to implement all these classes to the level they are taught at at Blair across the regional programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst thing about this is the loss of the incredible magnet teachers that we will have at both the RM IB and Blair SMCS. My son is a student at the Blair Magnet program, and their math teacher has a PHD in math from Yale! Other teachers are equally qualified and hold PHDs from many renowned universities in the country. There is no way that these teachers will opt for teaching county magnet programs, as they are more than qualified to teach college level classes with much more pay as well. They stay because they enjoy teaching a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. The loss of teachers will be something we won't be able to replace, even after Taylor is gone.

Seems like you are making a lot of assumptions here, about the teachers and the future students.

Not that pp, but my child also goes to the same program, and more than one teachers told their personal stories to students about why they chose to stay in Blair SMACS, and the reasons are highly similar to what described above. They will choose to leave the magnet as it's not rewarding anymore to themselves, and practically many of the current courses will not exist anymore due to lack of enrollment.

If true, those teachers are not great in reasoning then, and perhaps not as incredible as some PPs describe. They’re assuming students in the future regional magnet will not be a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. We don’t know the criteria of the regional program, so we don’t know what those students will be like. If they maintain a hard cutoff of 90% MAP (“A” students by objective measure), the type of students should be the same. Incredible teachers are good at reasoning and not emotionally reactive.

It has been repeatedly cited in this forum that the median MAP-M score for the admitted students is somewhere around 285, which is >99% for Grade 12 according to NWEA breakdown. More than 50% of the current SMACS students came from Churchill and Wootton, and the 3rd is WJ. Many admitted students had won state or national STEM prizes before joining SMACS. What makes believe that the new regional program wouldn't be significantly watered down?

The fact that most of the current students came from just 3 schools suggests that it should be no problem to fill the regional programs with kids from 4-5 schools each, right? The admission standards might have to be a tad bit lower if the distribution of smart kids isn't exactly equal between those 3 schools and the others in the county, but presumably that's a pretty small difference.

Is this a joke?
It's astronomically different. What is your explanation for why almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies for SMACS, while students from Rockville/Potomac/Bethesda bus in from far away?

SMACS already struggles to fill upper level courses, offering many electives only once every 2 years.

Splitting Blair SMACS into 3 would eliminate those classes.

The Functions (advanced/accelerated Alg2/Precalculus) class has 20 kids. If you split those kids across 2-3 regions, what happens to them?

Yes, there are students that would thrive in regional STEM programs that enhance their current home school offerings with more AP options and some electives. No, no one is helped by shattering the current SMACS into 4 parts and pretending that those kids are well-matched to programs that run courses at half the academic pace.

What on earth makes you think that "almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies"? There's like 30+ Silver Spring kids who actually attend Blair SMCS every year right now, plus presumably many others who get "beat out' by richer kids from elsewhere in the county who can juice their MAP scores in ways most Silver Spring families can't. Why would the difference in the number of smart, motivated kids from rich schools and poor schools be "astronomically different"?

37 in total from Blair catchment: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ56678E2B/$file/Attachment%20D%20SY2025%20Student%20Enrollment%20Countywide%20Programs%20250724.pdf

I agree with you that switching to regional model might encourage more admitted students from, e.g., Whiteman, to attend Blair. But the overall number of "qualified" students is undoubtedly going to reduce significantly. Of course you can always lower down the qualification threshold.

Blair is not the only school in Silver Spring. And if the qualification threshold isn't based on the intelligence and potential of the students, but is just based on getting super-high MAP scores which can be and frequently are gamed/skewed, then probably it should be lowered so that the smartest kids don't get blocked out by "merely bright" hard workers with rich parents who are good at test prep. But that doesn't mean the standards would be decreased-- arguably you would get even higher numbers of the smartest kids in that way.

CoGAT was used pre-pandemic as one key metrics for admission, and I remember there were data published somewhere before lottery was introduced to CES and MS magnets. The data clearly told the same story. People like you were furious back then that so many admitted kids were Asian and were from W's, so the lottery was pushed out by furious parents who can't acknowledge that their snowflakes aren't the genius. Now look at the degradation of MS magnets.

Not true pre-pandemic when CoGAT was administered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst thing about this is the loss of the incredible magnet teachers that we will have at both the RM IB and Blair SMCS. My son is a student at the Blair Magnet program, and their math teacher has a PHD in math from Yale! Other teachers are equally qualified and hold PHDs from many renowned universities in the country. There is no way that these teachers will opt for teaching county magnet programs, as they are more than qualified to teach college level classes with much more pay as well. They stay because they enjoy teaching a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. The loss of teachers will be something we won't be able to replace, even after Taylor is gone.

Seems like you are making a lot of assumptions here, about the teachers and the future students.

Not that pp, but my child also goes to the same program, and more than one teachers told their personal stories to students about why they chose to stay in Blair SMACS, and the reasons are highly similar to what described above. They will choose to leave the magnet as it's not rewarding anymore to themselves, and practically many of the current courses will not exist anymore due to lack of enrollment.

If true, those teachers are not great in reasoning then, and perhaps not as incredible as some PPs describe. They’re assuming students in the future regional magnet will not be a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. We don’t know the criteria of the regional program, so we don’t know what those students will be like. If they maintain a hard cutoff of 90% MAP (“A” students by objective measure), the type of students should be the same. Incredible teachers are good at reasoning and not emotionally reactive.

It has been repeatedly cited in this forum that the median MAP-M score for the admitted students is somewhere around 285, which is >99% for Grade 12 according to NWEA breakdown. More than 50% of the current SMACS students came from Churchill and Wootton, and the 3rd is WJ. Many admitted students had won state or national STEM prizes before joining SMACS. What makes believe that the new regional program wouldn't be significantly watered down?

The fact that most of the current students came from just 3 schools suggests that it should be no problem to fill the regional programs with kids from 4-5 schools each, right? The admission standards might have to be a tad bit lower if the distribution of smart kids isn't exactly equal between those 3 schools and the others in the county, but presumably that's a pretty small difference.

Is this a joke?
It's astronomically different. What is your explanation for why almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies for SMACS, while students from Rockville/Potomac/Bethesda bus in from far away?

SMACS already struggles to fill upper level courses, offering many electives only once every 2 years.

Splitting Blair SMACS into 3 would eliminate those classes.

The Functions (advanced/accelerated Alg2/Precalculus) class has 20 kids. If you split those kids across 2-3 regions, what happens to them?

Yes, there are students that would thrive in regional STEM programs that enhance their current home school offerings with more AP options and some electives. No, no one is helped by shattering the current SMACS into 4 parts and pretending that those kids are well-matched to programs that run courses at half the academic pace.

What on earth makes you think that "almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies"? There's like 30+ Silver Spring kids who actually attend Blair SMCS every year right now, plus presumably many others who get "beat out' by richer kids from elsewhere in the county who can juice their MAP scores in ways most Silver Spring families can't. Why would the difference in the number of smart, motivated kids from rich schools and poor schools be "astronomically different"?

37 in total from Blair catchment: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ56678E2B/$file/Attachment%20D%20SY2025%20Student%20Enrollment%20Countywide%20Programs%20250724.pdf

I agree with you that switching to regional model might encourage more admitted students from, e.g., Whiteman, to attend Blair. But the overall number of "qualified" students is undoubtedly going to reduce significantly. Of course you can always lower down the qualification threshold.

Blair is not the only school in Silver Spring. And if the qualification threshold isn't based on the intelligence and potential of the students, but is just based on getting super-high MAP scores which can be and frequently are gamed/skewed, then probably it should be lowered so that the smartest kids don't get blocked out by "merely bright" hard workers with rich parents who are good at test prep. But that doesn't mean the standards would be decreased-- arguably you would get even higher numbers of the smartest kids in that way.

The top feeders to Blair, by catchment, are:

1. Wootton (25%)
2. Churchill (20%)
3. The entire DCC combined. (Blair, Wheaton, Einstein, Kennedy, Northwood) (20%)

And that's not counting kids who don't go to Blair from W because of the long commute or because they go to elite private schools (Whitman catchment).

The "prep" whine is a myth. The W kids at SMACS who are getting that 285+ (SMACS median) are mostly getting it by 7th, a whole year ahead of the application deadline.

Anyone getting an A in geometry in 8th grade is getting 285+ or very close to it.

Anyway the whole "prep" complaint is nonsensical. If your kid doesn't like doing more than the minimum amount of work the school assigns in middle school, not even a tiny bit of Khan academy, then why the heck would your kid want to go to SMACS, with an extra course every year, with accelerated courses with more homework?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst thing about this is the loss of the incredible magnet teachers that we will have at both the RM IB and Blair SMCS. My son is a student at the Blair Magnet program, and their math teacher has a PHD in math from Yale! Other teachers are equally qualified and hold PHDs from many renowned universities in the country. There is no way that these teachers will opt for teaching county magnet programs, as they are more than qualified to teach college level classes with much more pay as well. They stay because they enjoy teaching a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. The loss of teachers will be something we won't be able to replace, even after Taylor is gone.

Do you think that Taylor even understands what he is doing? Getting rid of our high achieving programs is not going to correct educational disparities experienced in different student cohorts.

I’m sure he does not. Please make sure to reach out to him and to the board to let him know

They know exactly what they are doing. The purpose is to address equity and underrepresentation. Very well emphasized at the last BOE mtg.

And they deliberately don't want to replicate SMCS programming. They want SMCS to become generic STEM. That is the point.

I'm doing my part by registering DC as Hispanic, and DH doesn't draw an official salary from DIL's firm so we qualify for FARMS. (We pack lunch, of course.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst thing about this is the loss of the incredible magnet teachers that we will have at both the RM IB and Blair SMCS. My son is a student at the Blair Magnet program, and their math teacher has a PHD in math from Yale! Other teachers are equally qualified and hold PHDs from many renowned universities in the country. There is no way that these teachers will opt for teaching county magnet programs, as they are more than qualified to teach college level classes with much more pay as well. They stay because they enjoy teaching a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. The loss of teachers will be something we won't be able to replace, even after Taylor is gone.

Do you think that Taylor even understands what he is doing? Getting rid of our high achieving programs is not going to correct educational disparities experienced in different student cohorts.

I’m sure he does not. Please make sure to reach out to him and to the board to let him know

They know exactly what they are doing. The purpose is to address equity and underrepresentation. Very well emphasized at the last BOE mtg.

And they deliberately don't want to replicate SMCS programming. They want SMCS to become generic STEM. That is the point.

You’re missing the point. I don’t think he understands the implications of this plan and how it will actually pan out. Afterall they haven’t genuinely consulted families, or anyone involved with the magnet.

He doesn't understand what he is doing, and he doesn't care to investigate further by talking with high achieving students, their teachers and their principals.

Taylor was a terrible hire. He is making too many changes too quickly and he is making uninformed decisions. Geez, he can't even get payroll sorted correctly or security checks completed on personnel.

He should be counting votes on the BOE as to who is going to be around past the next election cycle. Odds are that 4 of them are retiring in the next election cycle. I am voting for the candidates who want to hire a new superintendent that has experience overseeing a large school district and understands the need to provide curriculum for a diversity of students, including high achievers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst thing about this is the loss of the incredible magnet teachers that we will have at both the RM IB and Blair SMCS. My son is a student at the Blair Magnet program, and their math teacher has a PHD in math from Yale! Other teachers are equally qualified and hold PHDs from many renowned universities in the country. There is no way that these teachers will opt for teaching county magnet programs, as they are more than qualified to teach college level classes with much more pay as well. They stay because they enjoy teaching a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. The loss of teachers will be something we won't be able to replace, even after Taylor is gone.

Seems like you are making a lot of assumptions here, about the teachers and the future students.

Not that pp, but my child also goes to the same program, and more than one teachers told their personal stories to students about why they chose to stay in Blair SMACS, and the reasons are highly similar to what described above. They will choose to leave the magnet as it's not rewarding anymore to themselves, and practically many of the current courses will not exist anymore due to lack of enrollment.

If true, those teachers are not great in reasoning then, and perhaps not as incredible as some PPs describe. They’re assuming students in the future regional magnet will not be a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. We don’t know the criteria of the regional program, so we don’t know what those students will be like. If they maintain a hard cutoff of 90% MAP (“A” students by objective measure), the type of students should be the same. Incredible teachers are good at reasoning and not emotionally reactive.

It has been repeatedly cited in this forum that the median MAP-M score for the admitted students is somewhere around 285, which is >99% for Grade 12 according to NWEA breakdown. More than 50% of the current SMACS students came from Churchill and Wootton, and the 3rd is WJ. Many admitted students had won state or national STEM prizes before joining SMACS. What makes believe that the new regional program wouldn't be significantly watered down?

The fact that most of the current students came from just 3 schools suggests that it should be no problem to fill the regional programs with kids from 4-5 schools each, right? The admission standards might have to be a tad bit lower if the distribution of smart kids isn't exactly equal between those 3 schools and the others in the county, but presumably that's a pretty small difference.

Is this a joke?
It's astronomically different. What is your explanation for why almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies for SMACS, while students from Rockville/Potomac/Bethesda bus in from far away?

SMACS already struggles to fill upper level courses, offering many electives only once every 2 years.

Splitting Blair SMACS into 3 would eliminate those classes.

The Functions (advanced/accelerated Alg2/Precalculus) class has 20 kids. If you split those kids across 2-3 regions, what happens to them?

Yes, there are students that would thrive in regional STEM programs that enhance their current home school offerings with more AP options and some electives. No, no one is helped by shattering the current SMACS into 4 parts and pretending that those kids are well-matched to programs that run courses at half the academic pace.

What on earth makes you think that "almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies"? There's like 30+ Silver Spring kids who actually attend Blair SMCS every year right now, plus presumably many others who get "beat out' by richer kids from elsewhere in the county who can juice their MAP scores in ways most Silver Spring families can't. Why would the difference in the number of smart, motivated kids from rich schools and poor schools be "astronomically different"?

37 in total from Blair catchment: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ56678E2B/$file/Attachment%20D%20SY2025%20Student%20Enrollment%20Countywide%20Programs%20250724.pdf

I agree with you that switching to regional model might encourage more admitted students from, e.g., Whiteman, to attend Blair. But the overall number of "qualified" students is undoubtedly going to reduce significantly. Of course you can always lower down the qualification threshold.

Blair is not the only school in Silver Spring. And if the qualification threshold isn't based on the intelligence and potential of the students, but is just based on getting super-high MAP scores which can be and frequently are gamed/skewed, then probably it should be lowered so that the smartest kids don't get blocked out by "merely bright" hard workers with rich parents who are good at test prep. But that doesn't mean the standards would be decreased-- arguably you would get even higher numbers of the smartest kids in that way.

CoGAT was used pre-pandemic as one key metrics for admission, and I remember there were data published somewhere before lottery was introduced to CES and MS magnets. The data clearly told the same story. People like you were furious back then that so many admitted kids were Asian and were from W's, so the lottery was pushed out by furious parents who can't acknowledge that their snowflakes aren't the genius. Now look at the degradation of MS magnets.

The CES programs are, by definition, regional. By and large, W-kids were being compared against other W-kids. With a couple of exceptions, the demographics under consideration were pretty similar. The fact that you didn't know that makes me question your entire post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst thing about this is the loss of the incredible magnet teachers that we will have at both the RM IB and Blair SMCS. My son is a student at the Blair Magnet program, and their math teacher has a PHD in math from Yale! Other teachers are equally qualified and hold PHDs from many renowned universities in the country. There is no way that these teachers will opt for teaching county magnet programs, as they are more than qualified to teach college level classes with much more pay as well. They stay because they enjoy teaching a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. The loss of teachers will be something we won't be able to replace, even after Taylor is gone.

Seems like you are making a lot of assumptions here, about the teachers and the future students.

Not that pp, but my child also goes to the same program, and more than one teachers told their personal stories to students about why they chose to stay in Blair SMACS, and the reasons are highly similar to what described above. They will choose to leave the magnet as it's not rewarding anymore to themselves, and practically many of the current courses will not exist anymore due to lack of enrollment.

If true, those teachers are not great in reasoning then, and perhaps not as incredible as some PPs describe. They’re assuming students in the future regional magnet will not be a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. We don’t know the criteria of the regional program, so we don’t know what those students will be like. If they maintain a hard cutoff of 90% MAP (“A” students by objective measure), the type of students should be the same. Incredible teachers are good at reasoning and not emotionally reactive.

It has been repeatedly cited in this forum that the median MAP-M score for the admitted students is somewhere around 285, which is >99% for Grade 12 according to NWEA breakdown. More than 50% of the current SMACS students came from Churchill and Wootton, and the 3rd is WJ. Many admitted students had won state or national STEM prizes before joining SMACS. What makes believe that the new regional program wouldn't be significantly watered down?

The fact that most of the current students came from just 3 schools suggests that it should be no problem to fill the regional programs with kids from 4-5 schools each, right? The admission standards might have to be a tad bit lower if the distribution of smart kids isn't exactly equal between those 3 schools and the others in the county, but presumably that's a pretty small difference.

Is this a joke?
It's astronomically different. What is your explanation for why almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies for SMACS, while students from Rockville/Potomac/Bethesda bus in from far away?

SMACS already struggles to fill upper level courses, offering many electives only once every 2 years.

Splitting Blair SMACS into 3 would eliminate those classes.

The Functions (advanced/accelerated Alg2/Precalculus) class has 20 kids. If you split those kids across 2-3 regions, what happens to them?

Yes, there are students that would thrive in regional STEM programs that enhance their current home school offerings with more AP options and some electives. No, no one is helped by shattering the current SMACS into 4 parts and pretending that those kids are well-matched to programs that run courses at half the academic pace.

What on earth makes you think that "almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies"? There's like 30+ Silver Spring kids who actually attend Blair SMCS every year right now, plus presumably many others who get "beat out' by richer kids from elsewhere in the county who can juice their MAP scores in ways most Silver Spring families can't. Why would the difference in the number of smart, motivated kids from rich schools and poor schools be "astronomically different"?

37 in total from Blair catchment: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ56678E2B/$file/Attachment%20D%20SY2025%20Student%20Enrollment%20Countywide%20Programs%20250724.pdf

I agree with you that switching to regional model might encourage more admitted students from, e.g., Whiteman, to attend Blair. But the overall number of "qualified" students is undoubtedly going to reduce significantly. Of course you can always lower down the qualification threshold.

Blair is not the only school in Silver Spring. And if the qualification threshold isn't based on the intelligence and potential of the students, but is just based on getting super-high MAP scores which can be and frequently are gamed/skewed, then probably it should be lowered so that the smartest kids don't get blocked out by "merely bright" hard workers with rich parents who are good at test prep. But that doesn't mean the standards would be decreased-- arguably you would get even higher numbers of the smartest kids in that way.

CoGAT was used pre-pandemic as one key metrics for admission, and I remember there were data published somewhere before lottery was introduced to CES and MS magnets. The data clearly told the same story. People like you were furious back then that so many admitted kids were Asian and were from W's, so the lottery was pushed out by furious parents who can't acknowledge that their snowflakes aren't the genius. Now look at the degradation of MS magnets.

The CES programs are, by definition, regional. By and large, W-kids were being compared against other W-kids. With a couple of exceptions, the demographics under consideration were pretty similar. The fact that you didn't know that makes me question your entire post.

Both my children went through the same CES pre- and post-pandemic. While the selection pool composition remain similar, and arguably ES curriculum is not entirely challenging, the experience was quite different. Pre-lottery selected students in my elder one’s class in general have 99% on map + cogat. After-pandemic, the selection criteria loosen to 95% for some ES in our high-SES region, but as low as 85% for some other ESs as I anecdotal heard. Ultimately I’m not opposed to lottery for ES magnet. Every kid has potentials and should be encouraged to reach their potentials. For MS and HS, this will only water down the program, as in homogeneity has been increased too large to be caught up with by that time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst thing about this is the loss of the incredible magnet teachers that we will have at both the RM IB and Blair SMCS. My son is a student at the Blair Magnet program, and their math teacher has a PHD in math from Yale! Other teachers are equally qualified and hold PHDs from many renowned universities in the country. There is no way that these teachers will opt for teaching county magnet programs, as they are more than qualified to teach college level classes with much more pay as well. They stay because they enjoy teaching a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. The loss of teachers will be something we won't be able to replace, even after Taylor is gone.

Seems like you are making a lot of assumptions here, about the teachers and the future students.

Not that pp, but my child also goes to the same program, and more than one teachers told their personal stories to students about why they chose to stay in Blair SMACS, and the reasons are highly similar to what described above. They will choose to leave the magnet as it's not rewarding anymore to themselves, and practically many of the current courses will not exist anymore due to lack of enrollment.

If true, those teachers are not great in reasoning then, and perhaps not as incredible as some PPs describe. They’re assuming students in the future regional magnet will not be a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. We don’t know the criteria of the regional program, so we don’t know what those students will be like. If they maintain a hard cutoff of 90% MAP (“A” students by objective measure), the type of students should be the same. Incredible teachers are good at reasoning and not emotionally reactive.

It has been repeatedly cited in this forum that the median MAP-M score for the admitted students is somewhere around 285, which is >99% for Grade 12 according to NWEA breakdown. More than 50% of the current SMACS students came from Churchill and Wootton, and the 3rd is WJ. Many admitted students had won state or national STEM prizes before joining SMACS. What makes believe that the new regional program wouldn't be significantly watered down?

The fact that most of the current students came from just 3 schools suggests that it should be no problem to fill the regional programs with kids from 4-5 schools each, right? The admission standards might have to be a tad bit lower if the distribution of smart kids isn't exactly equal between those 3 schools and the others in the county, but presumably that's a pretty small difference.

Is this a joke?
It's astronomically different. What is your explanation for why almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies for SMACS, while students from Rockville/Potomac/Bethesda bus in from far away?

SMACS already struggles to fill upper level courses, offering many electives only once every 2 years.

Splitting Blair SMACS into 3 would eliminate those classes.

The Functions (advanced/accelerated Alg2/Precalculus) class has 20 kids. If you split those kids across 2-3 regions, what happens to them?

Yes, there are students that would thrive in regional STEM programs that enhance their current home school offerings with more AP options and some electives. No, no one is helped by shattering the current SMACS into 4 parts and pretending that those kids are well-matched to programs that run courses at half the academic pace.

What on earth makes you think that "almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies"? There's like 30+ Silver Spring kids who actually attend Blair SMCS every year right now, plus presumably many others who get "beat out' by richer kids from elsewhere in the county who can juice their MAP scores in ways most Silver Spring families can't. Why would the difference in the number of smart, motivated kids from rich schools and poor schools be "astronomically different"?

37 in total from Blair catchment: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ56678E2B/$file/Attachment%20D%20SY2025%20Student%20Enrollment%20Countywide%20Programs%20250724.pdf

I agree with you that switching to regional model might encourage more admitted students from, e.g., Whiteman, to attend Blair. But the overall number of "qualified" students is undoubtedly going to reduce significantly. Of course you can always lower down the qualification threshold.

Blair is not the only school in Silver Spring. And if the qualification threshold isn't based on the intelligence and potential of the students, but is just based on getting super-high MAP scores which can be and frequently are gamed/skewed, then probably it should be lowered so that the smartest kids don't get blocked out by "merely bright" hard workers with rich parents who are good at test prep. But that doesn't mean the standards would be decreased-- arguably you would get even higher numbers of the smartest kids in that way.

The top feeders to Blair, by catchment, are:

1. Wootton (25%)
2. Churchill (20%)
3. The entire DCC combined. (Blair, Wheaton, Einstein, Kennedy, Northwood) (20%)

And that's not counting kids who don't go to Blair from W because of the long commute or because they go to elite private schools (Whitman catchment).

The "prep" whine is a myth. The W kids at SMACS who are getting that 285+ (SMACS median) are mostly getting it by 7th, a whole year ahead of the application deadline.

Anyone getting an A in geometry in 8th grade is getting 285+ or very close to it.

Anyway the whole "prep" complaint is nonsensical. If your kid doesn't like doing more than the minimum amount of work the school assigns in middle school, not even a tiny bit of Khan academy, then why the heck would your kid want to go to SMACS, with an extra course every year, with accelerated courses with more homework?

Do you seriously think that the only reason some kids don't do lots of supplementation and test prep is because they're not hard-working and don't like schoolwork? You must live in a bubble. Just because it's common knowledge in your circles that if you want to get into Blair you've got to play the game and do Khan Academy or whatever to get ahead of what's taught in school, doesn't mean that everyone else knows that. And they shouldn't have to, and families that do know shouldn't get extra advantages because of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of ya'll really need to settle down. Great teachers exist outside of the magnet programs. One of my kids not at a magnet Algebra teacher had a masters in math from John Hopkins. My other kid's MS math teacher (different school) was certified to teach math at the MS and HS level and was finishing up an Education Leadership doctorate.

Some teach a schools that are closer to where they live, others want to influence a certain demographic, and others are just happy at their school.

Will there likely need to be some hiring and training, sure, but if they finalize things in short order, like by February, they will have at least a whole year to get that done. Heck they could make it part of the recruiting strategy now.

No one said we don't have some great teachers, but some people want advanced math in *every* HS. Finding good teachers to teach really advanced math for every HS is going to be very difficult to find, not to mention the fact that in some schools there won't be enough demand for such classes to fill the classroom. Not good use of taxpayer $.

They only need one teacher for anything past bc. We have several teachers who could teach it. You just need Mv and linear algebra at every school. So, that’s two extra classes beyond what is provided now.

Not true... At Blair, math classes include Logic, Discrete Mathematics, Advanced Geometry, Origins of Math, Complex Analysis (This is the course after MV calc and Lin Alg), and an Advanced Statistics Class (not to be confused with AP Stats). Similar things hold for science classes. As you can clearly see, it will be impossible to implement all these classes to the level they are taught at at Blair across the regional programs.

You don't need all those. You just need MV and Linear Algebra at every school, so there is enough math to fulfill requirements. You keep pushing Blair but many of our kids have no interest in Blair but need more academic classes than are being offered. Pushing Blair is silly when it only takes 100 students. You are pushing needing more Blairs but even if there were more, my kids wouldn't choose it due to the rigid curriculum and distance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst thing about this is the loss of the incredible magnet teachers that we will have at both the RM IB and Blair SMCS. My son is a student at the Blair Magnet program, and their math teacher has a PHD in math from Yale! Other teachers are equally qualified and hold PHDs from many renowned universities in the country. There is no way that these teachers will opt for teaching county magnet programs, as they are more than qualified to teach college level classes with much more pay as well. They stay because they enjoy teaching a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. The loss of teachers will be something we won't be able to replace, even after Taylor is gone.

Do you think that Taylor even understands what he is doing? Getting rid of our high achieving programs is not going to correct educational disparities experienced in different student cohorts.

I’m sure he does not. Please make sure to reach out to him and to the board to let him know

They know exactly what they are doing. The purpose is to address equity and underrepresentation. Very well emphasized at the last BOE mtg.

And they deliberately don't want to replicate SMCS programming. They want SMCS to become generic STEM. That is the point.

You’re missing the point. I don’t think he understands the implications of this plan and how it will actually pan out. Afterall they haven’t genuinely consulted families, or anyone involved with the magnet.

He doesn't understand what he is doing, and he doesn't care to investigate further by talking with high achieving students, their teachers and their principals.

Taylor was a terrible hire. He is making too many changes too quickly and he is making uninformed decisions. Geez, he can't even get payroll sorted correctly or security checks completed on personnel.

He should be counting votes on the BOE as to who is going to be around past the next election cycle. Odds are that 4 of them are retiring in the next election cycle. I am voting for the candidates who want to hire a new superintendent that has experience overseeing a large school district and understands the need to provide curriculum for a diversity of students, including high achievers.

Taylor was hired to put on a show to deflect from the BOE's poor judgment and decisions. It was never intended for him to make real changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of ya'll really need to settle down. Great teachers exist outside of the magnet programs. One of my kids not at a magnet Algebra teacher had a masters in math from John Hopkins. My other kid's MS math teacher (different school) was certified to teach math at the MS and HS level and was finishing up an Education Leadership doctorate.

Some teach a schools that are closer to where they live, others want to influence a certain demographic, and others are just happy at their school.

Will there likely need to be some hiring and training, sure, but if they finalize things in short order, like by February, they will have at least a whole year to get that done. Heck they could make it part of the recruiting strategy now.

No one said we don't have some great teachers, but some people want advanced math in *every* HS. Finding good teachers to teach really advanced math for every HS is going to be very difficult to find, not to mention the fact that in some schools there won't be enough demand for such classes to fill the classroom. Not good use of taxpayer $.

They only need one teacher for anything past bc. We have several teachers who could teach it. You just need Mv and linear algebra at every school. So, that’s two extra classes beyond what is provided now.

Not true... At Blair, math classes include Logic, Discrete Mathematics, Advanced Geometry, Origins of Math, Complex Analysis (This is the course after MV calc and Lin Alg), and an Advanced Statistics Class (not to be confused with AP Stats). Similar things hold for science classes. As you can clearly see, it will be impossible to implement all these classes to the level they are taught at at Blair across the regional programs.

You don't need all those. You just need MV and Linear Algebra at every school, so there is enough math to fulfill requirements. You keep pushing Blair but many of our kids have no interest in Blair but need more academic classes than are being offered. Pushing Blair is silly when it only takes 100 students. You are pushing needing more Blairs but even if there were more, my kids wouldn't choose it due to the rigid curriculum and distance.

So the solution shouldn't be to get rid of Blair, but to increase hires of teachers who can teach these schools at every high school in MCPS. I really don't get why they're getting rid of Blair instead of improving on the courses and teachers at other high schools. I completely agree with your point that children in non-magnet programs need more qualified teachers teaching their courses. My son's home school has a mainly chemistry teacher teaching some part of MV Calc. But the solution shouldn't be getting rid of the magnet programs, that really help students interested in STEM. The idea of getting rid of Blair and RM IB is just silly in my opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst thing about this is the loss of the incredible magnet teachers that we will have at both the RM IB and Blair SMCS. My son is a student at the Blair Magnet program, and their math teacher has a PHD in math from Yale! Other teachers are equally qualified and hold PHDs from many renowned universities in the country. There is no way that these teachers will opt for teaching county magnet programs, as they are more than qualified to teach college level classes with much more pay as well. They stay because they enjoy teaching a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. The loss of teachers will be something we won't be able to replace, even after Taylor is gone.

Seems like you are making a lot of assumptions here, about the teachers and the future students.

Not that pp, but my child also goes to the same program, and more than one teachers told their personal stories to students about why they chose to stay in Blair SMACS, and the reasons are highly similar to what described above. They will choose to leave the magnet as it's not rewarding anymore to themselves, and practically many of the current courses will not exist anymore due to lack of enrollment.

If true, those teachers are not great in reasoning then, and perhaps not as incredible as some PPs describe. They’re assuming students in the future regional magnet will not be a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. We don’t know the criteria of the regional program, so we don’t know what those students will be like. If they maintain a hard cutoff of 90% MAP (“A” students by objective measure), the type of students should be the same. Incredible teachers are good at reasoning and not emotionally reactive.

It has been repeatedly cited in this forum that the median MAP-M score for the admitted students is somewhere around 285, which is >99% for Grade 12 according to NWEA breakdown. More than 50% of the current SMACS students came from Churchill and Wootton, and the 3rd is WJ. Many admitted students had won state or national STEM prizes before joining SMACS. What makes believe that the new regional program wouldn't be significantly watered down?

The fact that most of the current students came from just 3 schools suggests that it should be no problem to fill the regional programs with kids from 4-5 schools each, right? The admission standards might have to be a tad bit lower if the distribution of smart kids isn't exactly equal between those 3 schools and the others in the county, but presumably that's a pretty small difference.

Is this a joke?
It's astronomically different. What is your explanation for why almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies for SMACS, while students from Rockville/Potomac/Bethesda bus in from far away?

SMACS already struggles to fill upper level courses, offering many electives only once every 2 years.

Splitting Blair SMACS into 3 would eliminate those classes.

The Functions (advanced/accelerated Alg2/Precalculus) class has 20 kids. If you split those kids across 2-3 regions, what happens to them?

Yes, there are students that would thrive in regional STEM programs that enhance their current home school offerings with more AP options and some electives. No, no one is helped by shattering the current SMACS into 4 parts and pretending that those kids are well-matched to programs that run courses at half the academic pace.

What on earth makes you think that "almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies"? There's like 30+ Silver Spring kids who actually attend Blair SMCS every year right now, plus presumably many others who get "beat out' by richer kids from elsewhere in the county who can juice their MAP scores in ways most Silver Spring families can't. Why would the difference in the number of smart, motivated kids from rich schools and poor schools be "astronomically different"?

37 in total from Blair catchment: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ56678E2B/$file/Attachment%20D%20SY2025%20Student%20Enrollment%20Countywide%20Programs%20250724.pdf

I agree with you that switching to regional model might encourage more admitted students from, e.g., Whiteman, to attend Blair. But the overall number of "qualified" students is undoubtedly going to reduce significantly. Of course you can always lower down the qualification threshold.

Blair is not the only school in Silver Spring. And if the qualification threshold isn't based on the intelligence and potential of the students, but is just based on getting super-high MAP scores which can be and frequently are gamed/skewed, then probably it should be lowered so that the smartest kids don't get blocked out by "merely bright" hard workers with rich parents who are good at test prep. But that doesn't mean the standards would be decreased-- arguably you would get even higher numbers of the smartest kids in that way.

CoGAT was used pre-pandemic as one key metrics for admission, and I remember there were data published somewhere before lottery was introduced to CES and MS magnets. The data clearly told the same story. People like you were furious back then that so many admitted kids were Asian and were from W's, so the lottery was pushed out by furious parents who can't acknowledge that their snowflakes aren't the genius. Now look at the degradation of MS magnets.

The CES programs are, by definition, regional. By and large, W-kids were being compared against other W-kids. With a couple of exceptions, the demographics under consideration were pretty similar. The fact that you didn't know that makes me question your entire post.

Both my children went through the same CES pre- and post-pandemic. While the selection pool composition remain similar, and arguably ES curriculum is not entirely challenging, the experience was quite different. Pre-lottery selected students in my elder one’s class in general have 99% on map + cogat. After-pandemic, the selection criteria loosen to 95% for some ES in our high-SES region, but as low as 85% for some other ESs as I anecdotal heard. Ultimately I’m not opposed to lottery for ES magnet. Every kid has potentials and should be encouraged to reach their potentials. For MS and HS, this will only water down the program, as in homogeneity has been increased too large to be caught up with by that time.

Game this out with me. CES programs are regional and largely homogenous. So, the cut-off is higher programs that serve high-income communities, and lower in more economically diverse catchment areas.

You claim there was a significant difference in the quality of student, but also claim to live in a high SES region. So your big complaint is that the cut-off for the lottery dropped from 99% (estimated by you)_to about 95% (again, estimated by you) and that produced a huge swing in pupil quality?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst thing about this is the loss of the incredible magnet teachers that we will have at both the RM IB and Blair SMCS. My son is a student at the Blair Magnet program, and their math teacher has a PHD in math from Yale! Other teachers are equally qualified and hold PHDs from many renowned universities in the country. There is no way that these teachers will opt for teaching county magnet programs, as they are more than qualified to teach college level classes with much more pay as well. They stay because they enjoy teaching a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. The loss of teachers will be something we won't be able to replace, even after Taylor is gone.

Seems like you are making a lot of assumptions here, about the teachers and the future students.

Not that pp, but my child also goes to the same program, and more than one teachers told their personal stories to students about why they chose to stay in Blair SMACS, and the reasons are highly similar to what described above. They will choose to leave the magnet as it's not rewarding anymore to themselves, and practically many of the current courses will not exist anymore due to lack of enrollment.

If true, those teachers are not great in reasoning then, and perhaps not as incredible as some PPs describe. They’re assuming students in the future regional magnet will not be a group of highly motivated students who love to learn. We don’t know the criteria of the regional program, so we don’t know what those students will be like. If they maintain a hard cutoff of 90% MAP (“A” students by objective measure), the type of students should be the same. Incredible teachers are good at reasoning and not emotionally reactive.

It has been repeatedly cited in this forum that the median MAP-M score for the admitted students is somewhere around 285, which is >99% for Grade 12 according to NWEA breakdown. More than 50% of the current SMACS students came from Churchill and Wootton, and the 3rd is WJ. Many admitted students had won state or national STEM prizes before joining SMACS. What makes believe that the new regional program wouldn't be significantly watered down?

The fact that most of the current students came from just 3 schools suggests that it should be no problem to fill the regional programs with kids from 4-5 schools each, right? The admission standards might have to be a tad bit lower if the distribution of smart kids isn't exactly equal between those 3 schools and the others in the county, but presumably that's a pretty small difference.

Is this a joke?
It's astronomically different. What is your explanation for why almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies for SMACS, while students from Rockville/Potomac/Bethesda bus in from far away?

SMACS already struggles to fill upper level courses, offering many electives only once every 2 years.

Splitting Blair SMACS into 3 would eliminate those classes.

The Functions (advanced/accelerated Alg2/Precalculus) class has 20 kids. If you split those kids across 2-3 regions, what happens to them?

Yes, there are students that would thrive in regional STEM programs that enhance their current home school offerings with more AP options and some electives. No, no one is helped by shattering the current SMACS into 4 parts and pretending that those kids are well-matched to programs that run courses at half the academic pace.

What on earth makes you think that "almost no one in Silver Spring qualifies"? There's like 30+ Silver Spring kids who actually attend Blair SMCS every year right now, plus presumably many others who get "beat out' by richer kids from elsewhere in the county who can juice their MAP scores in ways most Silver Spring families can't. Why would the difference in the number of smart, motivated kids from rich schools and poor schools be "astronomically different"?

37 in total from Blair catchment: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ56678E2B/$file/Attachment%20D%20SY2025%20Student%20Enrollment%20Countywide%20Programs%20250724.pdf

I agree with you that switching to regional model might encourage more admitted students from, e.g., Whiteman, to attend Blair. But the overall number of "qualified" students is undoubtedly going to reduce significantly. Of course you can always lower down the qualification threshold.

Blair is not the only school in Silver Spring. And if the qualification threshold isn't based on the intelligence and potential of the students, but is just based on getting super-high MAP scores which can be and frequently are gamed/skewed, then probably it should be lowered so that the smartest kids don't get blocked out by "merely bright" hard workers with rich parents who are good at test prep. But that doesn't mean the standards would be decreased-- arguably you would get even higher numbers of the smartest kids in that way.

The top feeders to Blair, by catchment, are:

1. Wootton (25%)
2. Churchill (20%)
3. The entire DCC combined. (Blair, Wheaton, Einstein, Kennedy, Northwood) (20%)

And that's not counting kids who don't go to Blair from W because of the long commute or because they go to elite private schools (Whitman catchment).

The "prep" whine is a myth. The W kids at SMACS who are getting that 285+ (SMACS median) are mostly getting it by 7th, a whole year ahead of the application deadline.

Anyone getting an A in geometry in 8th grade is getting 285+ or very close to it.

Anyway the whole "prep" complaint is nonsensical. If your kid doesn't like doing more than the minimum amount of work the school assigns in middle school, not even a tiny bit of Khan academy, then why the heck would your kid want to go to SMACS, with an extra course every year, with accelerated courses with more homework?

Do you seriously think that the only reason some kids don't do lots of supplementation and test prep is because they're not hard-working and don't like schoolwork? You must live in a bubble. Just because it's common knowledge in your circles that if you want to get into Blair you've got to play the game and do Khan Academy or whatever to get ahead of what's taught in school, doesn't mean that everyone else knows that. And they shouldn't have to, and families that do know shouldn't get extra advantages because of it.

Teachers are perfectly capable of mentoring smart, but disadvantaged kids. That happened to lots of us. And frankly, those kids have lots of time in class with Chromebooks if they want to do well.