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

[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.

Every year people keep talking about central office bloat. And while there may be some I doubt it's nearly as much as people think. Central Office accounts for like 2% of all MCPS funding.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Every year people keep talking about central office bloat. And while there may be some I doubt it's nearly as much as people think. Central Office accounts for like 2% of all MCPS funding.

What is MCPS budget? Isn't it over 3 bil now? So over 60 mil/year?

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Every year people keep talking about central office bloat. And while there may be some I doubt it's nearly as much as people think. Central Office accounts for like 2% of all MCPS funding.

What is MCPS budget? Isn't it over 3 bil now? So over 60 mil/year?

And as we say each year, if you'd like to take a gander at the Operating Budget and start eliminating lines and people, have at it. There are meetings held each year and opportunities fro testimony. We'd love to hear who/what/where you would like to cut while also being sure to complete the necessary work to both support schools, staff, families, and be in compliance with all county, state, and federal mandates.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Every year people keep talking about central office bloat. And while there may be some I doubt it's nearly as much as people think. Central Office accounts for like 2% of all MCPS funding.

What is MCPS budget? Isn't it over 3 bil now? So over 60 mil/year?

And as we say each year, if you'd like to take a gander at the Operating Budget and start eliminating lines and people, have at it. There are meetings held each year and opportunities fro testimony. We'd love to hear who/what/where you would like to cut while also being sure to complete the necessary work to both support schools, staff, families, and be in compliance with all county, state, and federal mandates.

You need a meeting with DOGE.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Every year people keep talking about central office bloat. And while there may be some I doubt it's nearly as much as people think. Central Office accounts for like 2% of all MCPS funding.

What is MCPS budget? Isn't it over 3 bil now? So over 60 mil/year?

And as we say each year, if you'd like to take a gander at the Operating Budget and start eliminating lines and people, have at it. There are meetings held each year and opportunities fro testimony. We'd love to hear who/what/where you would like to cut while also being sure to complete the necessary work to both support schools, staff, families, and be in compliance with all county, state, and federal mandates.

You need a meeting with DOGE.

I've seen their work, and can absolutely say, without a doubt, DOGE would not getting a meeting nor phone call.

[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?

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

Wow, that is a ton of classes. How do they manage to offer that many classes a year? It seems like there wouldn't be enough kids and time in the schedule....

[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.

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

Wow, that is a ton of classes. How do they manage to offer that many classes a year? It seems like there wouldn't be enough kids and time in the schedule....

Magnet students have an extra class period, and mostly finish required classes by 10th grade, leaving many slots on their schedules available for electives.

[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: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

Yes! It's common knowledge starting from ES that there are more students who should have a greater challenge than can be provided for in the current magnet structure. That was the whole reason for creation of ELC classes in ES and doing a central evaluation. Do you think those kids just drop-off? Not to mention, there has been several studies done, including one around the EMLs that showed students were being denied access who would thrive. For example, just because they speak another language, doesn't mean they are incapable of getting to advance math.

There is 25 HS with an average of say 450 kids per grade (if not more). Do you really believe the 300-400 student/per grade from two SMACs programs and a IB program covers is an ideal representation of MCPS capable students. That like would like 2.5% of each HS grade.

That's why these programs are so special. Our daughter's class had almost 40% NMSF. Most MCPS HSs don't even have single NMSF.

And most are from well-resourced families. Like I said above, the helicopter parents for this ultra-tiny minority can easily figure out where to further their kids’ education without having taxpayers so much for classes almost no one has access to.

[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: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

Yes! It's common knowledge starting from ES that there are more students who should have a greater challenge than can be provided for in the current magnet structure. That was the whole reason for creation of ELC classes in ES and doing a central evaluation. Do you think those kids just drop-off? Not to mention, there has been several studies done, including one around the EMLs that showed students were being denied access who would thrive. For example, just because they speak another language, doesn't mean they are incapable of getting to advance math.

There is 25 HS with an average of say 450 kids per grade (if not more). Do you really believe the 300-400 student/per grade from two SMACs programs and a IB program covers is an ideal representation of MCPS capable students. That like would like 2.5% of each HS grade.

That's why these programs are so special. Our daughter's class had almost 40% NMSF. Most MCPS HSs don't even have single NMSF.

That’s crazy!!

[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: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

Yes! It's common knowledge starting from ES that there are more students who should have a greater challenge than can be provided for in the current magnet structure. That was the whole reason for creation of ELC classes in ES and doing a central evaluation. Do you think those kids just drop-off? Not to mention, there has been several studies done, including one around the EMLs that showed students were being denied access who would thrive. For example, just because they speak another language, doesn't mean they are incapable of getting to advance math.

There is 25 HS with an average of say 450 kids per grade (if not more). Do you really believe the 300-400 student/per grade from two SMACs programs and a IB program covers is an ideal representation of MCPS capable students. That like would like 2.5% of each HS grade.

That's why these programs are so special. Our daughter's class had almost 40% NMSF. Most MCPS HSs don't even have single NMSF.

And most are from well-resourced families. Like I said above, the helicopter parents for this ultra-tiny minority can easily figure out where to further their kids’ education without having taxpayers so much for classes almost no one has access to.

Don’t we want to foster the top of the sake of our society? What happened to race to the top? Apparently we’re now okay with regression to the mean… smh

[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: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

Yes! It's common knowledge starting from ES that there are more students who should have a greater challenge than can be provided for in the current magnet structure. That was the whole reason for creation of ELC classes in ES and doing a central evaluation. Do you think those kids just drop-off? Not to mention, there has been several studies done, including one around the EMLs that showed students were being denied access who would thrive. For example, just because they speak another language, doesn't mean they are incapable of getting to advance math.

There is 25 HS with an average of say 450 kids per grade (if not more). Do you really believe the 300-400 student/per grade from two SMACs programs and a IB program covers is an ideal representation of MCPS capable students. That like would like 2.5% of each HS grade.

That's why these programs are so special. Our daughter's class had almost 40% NMSF. Most MCPS HSs don't even have single NMSF.

And most are from well-resourced families. Like I said above, the helicopter parents for this ultra-tiny minority can easily figure out where to further their kids’ education without having taxpayers so much for classes almost no one has access to.

Ahh, anti-Asian racist poster finally showing his hands. It’s not my fault if your kid is not accepted. Everybody has equal chance.

[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?

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

No wonder they "can barely fill" some of these classes with Blair magnet kids given how many they are! Seems less like a "there are only a few kids in the county smart enough to take these classes" thing and more like a "if kids can pick between 40 different science/computer science classes then of course not all of them are going to be packed full every year" thing.

Yes, I imagine it will be hard to replicate all of these classes at new regional schools. But is it really that big a deal to keep every single one of these? Just cut the number of special classes in half and let the kids wait for college to specialize quite that much.

[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:

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

Yes! It's common knowledge starting from ES that there are more students who should have a greater challenge than can be provided for in the current magnet structure. That was the whole reason for creation of ELC classes in ES and doing a central evaluation. Do you think those kids just drop-off? Not to mention, there has been several studies done, including one around the EMLs that showed students were being denied access who would thrive. For example, just because they speak another language, doesn't mean they are incapable of getting to advance math.

There is 25 HS with an average of say 450 kids per grade (if not more). Do you really believe the 300-400 student/per grade from two SMACs programs and a IB program covers is an ideal representation of MCPS capable students. That like would like 2.5% of each HS grade.

That's why these programs are so special. Our daughter's class had almost 40% NMSF. Most MCPS HSs don't even have single NMSF.

And most are from well-resourced families. Like I said above, the helicopter parents for this ultra-tiny minority can easily figure out where to further their kids’ education without having taxpayers so much for classes almost no one has access to.

Don’t we want to foster the top of the sake of our society? What happened to race to the top? Apparently we’re now okay with regression to the mean… smh

We are talking about a program that most kids apply for when they are 13. It's not regression to the mean if more kids have access to the accelerated curriculum, and it's not regression to the mean if kids need to take Thermodynamics in undergraduate rather than high school.

[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:

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

Yes! It's common knowledge starting from ES that there are more students who should have a greater challenge than can be provided for in the current magnet structure. That was the whole reason for creation of ELC classes in ES and doing a central evaluation. Do you think those kids just drop-off? Not to mention, there has been several studies done, including one around the EMLs that showed students were being denied access who would thrive. For example, just because they speak another language, doesn't mean they are incapable of getting to advance math.

There is 25 HS with an average of say 450 kids per grade (if not more). Do you really believe the 300-400 student/per grade from two SMACs programs and a IB program covers is an ideal representation of MCPS capable students. That like would like 2.5% of each HS grade.

That's why these programs are so special. Our daughter's class had almost 40% NMSF. Most MCPS HSs don't even have single NMSF.

And most are from well-resourced families. Like I said above, the helicopter parents for this ultra-tiny minority can easily figure out where to further their kids’ education without having taxpayers so much for classes almost no one has access to.

Don’t we want to foster the top of the sake of our society? What happened to race to the top? Apparently we’re now okay with regression to the mean… smh

We are talking about a program that most kids apply for when they are 13. It's not regression to the mean if more kids have access to the accelerated curriculum, and it's not regression to the mean if kids need to take Thermodynamics in undergraduate rather than high school.

If expanding access keeps the level of coursework the same, fine. But, as we've seen with "honors for all," that's usually not the case. Honors for all has meant honors for none.

Gifted students need to be challenged. MCPS keeps doing things to take away whatever challenge they might have.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Every year people keep talking about central office bloat. And while there may be some I doubt it's nearly as much as people think. Central Office accounts for like 2% of all MCPS funding.

What is MCPS budget? Isn't it over 3 bil now? So over 60 mil/year?

One idiosyncrasy of MCPS is that key staff who would be listed as "school based" in another school district are listed as "Central Office" in MCPS. So jobs like speech pathologists, occupational therapists, school psychologists (for testing), and other roles that directly engage with children, end up in the CO budget, which makes it look much larger than it is.