Program analysis webinars

[Anonymous]

MCPS is having a series of webinars on the program analysis from 9/29 to 10/27 (click on the link at the top of this page: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/academic-programs-analysis/ ) Some are DCC or NEC specific and others are general.

I don't know whether they will be structured to actually collect feedback from attendees (versus just being "informational"/answering questions), but I imagine there will be ways to make your opinions heard during the meetings regardless...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is having a series of webinars on the program analysis from 9/29 to 10/27 (click on the link at the top of this page: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/academic-programs-analysis/ ) Some are DCC or NEC specific and others are general.

I don't know whether they will be structured to actually collect feedback from attendees (versus just being "informational"/answering questions), but I imagine there will be ways to make your opinions heard during the meetings regardless...

It wouldn't surprise me if they use the zoom format where they take no public comments or questions from the audience, so just one-way information sharing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is having a series of webinars on the program analysis from 9/29 to 10/27 (click on the link at the top of this page: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/academic-programs-analysis/ ) Some are DCC or NEC specific and others are general.

I don't know whether they will be structured to actually collect feedback from attendees (versus just being "informational"/answering questions), but I imagine there will be ways to make your opinions heard during the meetings regardless...

It wouldn't surprise me if they use the zoom format where they take no public comments or questions from the audience, so just one-way information sharing.

I think they want to claim to the the Board that they have gotten public feedback on this (despite planning to totally ignore it if they don't like it), so I suspect they will at least have some option, even if limited.

[Anonymous]

Did anyone go to the NEC ones today? How was it structured? Anything notable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone go to the NEC ones today? How was it structured? Anything notable?

They only pick and show the questions they want to answer and want others to see, dodging and hiding the more critical ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone go to the NEC ones today? How was it structured? Anything notable?

They only pick and show the questions they want to answer and want others to see, dodging and hiding the more critical ones.

Is this first hand experience? If you can collect a few screenshots to show how they ignore critical questions that you or others raised, send the evidences to BOE and cc sup and central office staff.

I complained to them about the webminar sessions only open to consortiums and 6th and 7th graders last week. No one responded but they did open the Oct. sessions now to general audience. So please act when you see something suspicious or if they use these webminars to prove they had collected community inputs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone go to the NEC ones today? How was it structured? Anything notable?

They only pick and show the questions they want to answer and want others to see, dodging and hiding the more critical ones.

Is this first hand experience? If you can collect a few screenshots to show how they ignore critical questions that you or others raised, send the evidences to BOE and cc sup and central office staff.

I complained to them about the webminar sessions only open to consortiums and 6th and 7th graders last week. No one responded but they did open the Oct. sessions now to general audience. So please act when you see something suspicious or if they use these webminars to prove they had collected community inputs.

In this webinar format they chose to use, you only get to see the questions the host allows you to see. Very convenient for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone go to the NEC ones today? How was it structured? Anything notable?

They only pick and show the questions they want to answer and want others to see, dodging and hiding the more critical ones.

Is this first hand experience? If you can collect a few screenshots to show how they ignore critical questions that you or others raised, send the evidences to BOE and cc sup and central office staff.

I complained to them about the webminar sessions only open to consortiums and 6th and 7th graders last week. No one responded but they did open the Oct. sessions now to general audience. So please act when you see something suspicious or if they use these webminars to prove they had collected community inputs.

In this webinar format they chose to use, you only get to see the questions the host allows you to see. Very convenient for them.

You can ask sharp questions and see if they intentionally ignore. You can write to BOE and CO to ask for open-discussion platform communication and invite BOE members to join. If BOE members choose to hide away, we have to stand out and proactively force the process not one-way, but two-way, right?

[Anonymous]

The NEC one just ended. I didn't take a screenshot, but they definitely skipped questions. They also gave generic answers to some questions. For example, they said this program was needed to increase opportunities for participation because students were left out due to limited slots in prior programs. They mentioned about 2000 students not being able to participate currently. The questions asked were how many more slots would this program open and would there be set asides for local students if they wanted to apply to the program in their home school? They could not say how many slots this model opens to students. Their answer was that now all high schools will have a program, but did not address still having students unable to participate. They acknowledged that there are current programs with local set asides, but they are not currently a part of this plan. They did not answer if local students in the home school will have home program priority or a set aside. I can see how they wouldn't because they are supposed to give everyone a chance.

The DCC meeting is supposed to be tomorrow. They may have better answers then. They do not have all the programs in place, but believe they will be ready in time. Sherwood will have an engineering and language focus. Blake will have a performing arts and education focus. Paint Branch will be leadership and health careers. Springbrook will be IB and something else I forgot.

[Anonymous]

Any thoughts on the DCC ones?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any thoughts on the DCC ones?

Similar. They are refining as they go. That includes refining their approach to avoiding certain pointed questions.

[Anonymous]

At DCC meeting today they answered questions about lack of public feedback by saying that the proposal was prepared for the Board, and they are now getting the feedback from the public. They reassured that no current local program will be eliminated but dodged questions about whether the programs will be effectively weakened and interest will then lack due to new programs structure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At DCC meeting today they answered questions about lack of public feedback by saying that the proposal was prepared for the Board, and they are now getting the feedback from the public. They reassured that no current local program will be eliminated but dodged questions about whether the programs will be effectively weakened and interest will then lack due to new programs structure.

Central office is very good at dodging questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone go to the NEC ones today? How was it structured? Anything notable?

They only pick and show the questions they want to answer and want others to see, dodging and hiding the more critical ones.

Yup.

[Anonymous]

Frankly speaking, I think many parents/students want to see the HS programs expand, but not with the six regional model. I would say probably 3 or 4 regions would make more sense.

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is having a series of webinars on the program analysis from 9/29 to 10/27 (click on the link at the top of this page: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/academic-programs-analysis/ ) Some are DCC or NEC specific and others are general.

I don't know whether they will be structured to actually collect feedback from attendees (versus just being "informational"/answering questions), but I imagine there will be ways to make your opinions heard during the meetings regardless...