Magnets, Regions, and the Future of MCPS Gifted Kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

Commutes under the proposed model are about the same commute time as the current model. Commute is not a selling point for the proposed regions model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

Commutes under the proposed model are about the same commute time as the current model. Commute is not a selling point for the proposed regions model.

Truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

Commutes under the proposed model are about the same commute time as the current model. Commute is not a selling point for the proposed regions model.

Is Churchill to Blair really the same as Einstein to Blair?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

For high school, kids need to be picked up and dropped off multiple times a day, except when they can stay so some of us are driving back and forth for one child up to 4 times a day. Its not just back and forth to school once.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

Commutes under the proposed model are about the same commute time as the current model. Commute is not a selling point for the proposed regions model.

Is Churchill to Blair really the same as Einstein to Blair?

Not even close. You can take the back roads to Einstein to Blair but Churchill is a haul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

Commutes under the proposed model are about the same commute time as the current model. Commute is not a selling point for the proposed regions model.

Truth.

They are I guess an argument to put magnet programs in Whitman and BCC since they have been so deprived of magnet programs. But that only makes sense if you pretend they don't already have solid IB and Humanities coursework (in addition to all the math and science) available to their students and don't need a magnet to have that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

Commutes under the proposed model are about the same commute time as the current model. Commute is not a selling point for the proposed regions model.

Truth.

They are I guess an argument to put magnet programs in Whitman and BCC since they have been so deprived of magnet programs. But that only makes sense if you pretend they don't already have solid IB and Humanities coursework (in addition to all the math and science) available to their students and don't need a magnet to have that.

The reason why they were chosen is this is all show and no substance. If they put true magnet or other programs in other schools, they'd have to hire more staff and provide resources for those classes. With this model, they get rid of the DCC, all kids go to their home schools except a select few and less kids get access to what they need as they aren't putting in anything new into the home schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

Commutes under the proposed model are about the same commute time as the current model. Commute is not a selling point for the proposed regions model.

Truth.

They are I guess an argument to put magnet programs in Whitman and BCC since they have been so deprived of magnet programs. But that only makes sense if you pretend they don't already have solid IB and Humanities coursework (in addition to all the math and science) available to their students and don't need a magnet to have that.

The reason why they were chosen is this is all show and no substance. If they put true magnet or other programs in other schools, they'd have to hire more staff and provide resources for those classes. With this model, they get rid of the DCC, all kids go to their home schools except a select few and less kids get access to what they need as they aren't putting in anything new into the home schools.

+1 and since some DCC students do get to go to Whitman and BCC especially if they have parents that can drive and no need for a job, that eliminates the need for Einstein and Northwood to expand advanced academic courses. Who cares about the many kids that can't travel/don't get into the special programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

Commutes under the proposed model are about the same commute time as the current model. Commute is not a selling point for the proposed regions model.

Is Churchill to Blair really the same as Einstein to Blair?

Not even close. You can take the back roads to Einstein to Blair but Churchill is a haul.

So the commutes are shorter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

Commutes under the proposed model are about the same commute time as the current model. Commute is not a selling point for the proposed regions model.

Is Churchill to Blair really the same as Einstein to Blair?

Not even close. You can take the back roads to Einstein to Blair but Churchill is a haul.

So the commutes are shorter.

We're talking about commutes to Blair from BCC and Whitman. The IB at BCC will be closed so that's not the same.

[Anonymous]

Closer, not closed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

For high school, kids need to be picked up and dropped off multiple times a day, except when they can stay so some of us are driving back and forth for one child up to 4 times a day. Its not just back and forth to school once.

Wow, that is not how high school was for me. Nor do most families do this anywhere in Montgomery County now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

Commutes under the proposed model are about the same commute time as the current model. Commute is not a selling point for the proposed regions model.

Is Churchill to Blair really the same as Einstein to Blair?

Not even close. You can take the back roads to Einstein to Blair but Churchill is a haul.

So the commutes are shorter.

We're talking about commutes to Blair from BCC and Whitman. The IB at BCC will be closed so that's not the same.

You are taking about that. Others are talking about having magnets closer to their schools. Again, there are other schools in the district beyond region 1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need a program if only to say that they aren’t excluding kids from other schools. If they don’t have one it looks exclusionary.

This statement implies an equality mindset, not an equity mindset. If they were taking an equity approach, their goal would not be to create a system that looks uniform, because they would be acknowledging that different school communities need different things. Having low income kids travel the Bethesda for criteria based programs is not equity, it's inequity.

Well I for one am sick of equity mindset because it means different things to different people and it’s weaponized to pit kids against each other and manipulate decisions. I’m cool with the “give kids what they each need” definition. I’m really not cool with the constant redistribution of opportunities ignoring the needs of actual kids in favor of optics and quotas and treating seeing kids only as members of racial or socioeconomic monoliths.

In terms of academic opportunities, which ones do wealthy schools not have that they need? For example Whitman and BCC send very very few kids to Blair or RMIB. Is it because these commutes are so bad or is it because both of these schools have a wealth of advanced math and science classes?

It’s both. The commutes are legitimately bad and the magnet bus coverage from those clusters is not super convenient. And if your home school is great and offers enough of what you need, it can be harder to justify making the transportation sacrifice. It’s also a bit of a vibe thing. Many BCC families aren’t science Olympiad types.

What's so terrible about those commutes? They go against traffic for both schools. As far as long commutes to magnet programs go these are really not bad

For high school, kids need to be picked up and dropped off multiple times a day, except when they can stay so some of us are driving back and forth for one child up to 4 times a day. Its not just back and forth to school once.

Wow, that is not how high school was for me. Nor do most families do this anywhere in Montgomery County now.

I am also not thinking that traveling to school 4 times a day is that common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An equitable approach to criteria based academic programs would be to:

1. Analyze which schools need a larger cohort of academically advanced kids to staff advanced academic classes

2. Place the criteria based academic programs in those schools

Don't place criteria based academic programs in schools that ALREADY have large enough cohorts to staff advanced classes. That is inequity disguised as equality which is then confused with equity.

This is a really good idea