New presentation & FAQ up for program analysis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would love for them to go into detail on the inequities in MCPS. Not just the supposed "inequities" that they are using to justify eliminating the consortia, but all the inequities.

The consortia is the only thing close to equity the DCC has.

[Anonymous]

MCPS says this about central stop transportation. There are apparently no guarantees of a stop within walking distance. How is this possibly equitable? The programs will only be for kids whose parents can drive them to a central stop?

"According to MCPS Regulation EEA-RA, Student
Transportation, Section II.B.2, “Centralized bus
service, defined as transportation from a central
location such as a neighborhood elementary
school, to the program site, may be provided to
students attending specific programs as identi-
fied in the MCPS Options (Guide to Countywide
Programs) booklet, in accordance with Board
action, attendance areas, transportation services,
and funding levels. Parents/guardians are respon-
sible for students’ transportation to and from
centralized bus stops, whether or not there is an
appropriate walking route.” Central stops are
placed at MCPS schools and other government
facilities. Not all students will have a bus stop
within walking distance of their home."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No words on the lottery in criteria based programs?

Anonymous wrote:New slides: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PXEGp4xDGcnFZQ3aVA3TNF191YNU2tc3TgaWs2PM9rE/edit?slide=id.g39ec8c68b94_2_165#slide=id.g39ec8c68b94_2_165 15 minutes of questions planned in small groups, "feedback" collected on post it notes

New FAQ: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sYH8G9mVKZI0Bkm_-ZXoSszwRGnrsemE_ksF7DZR4fs/edit?usp=drivesdk

Answer to why they are rushing the program changes now: "The changes are happening now to address historical inequities and a scarcity model that limits access to high-demand programs for many students. The program analysis is being done concurrently with the boundary study (final decision expected March 2026) to provide families with a full picture of school assignments and program access at the same time."

They say this but honestly I don't believe it since it contradicts other things they've said:

" No. Excellence and equity go hand in hand. Admission criteria, curriculum standards, and accountability measures will remain in place. Expansion means more qualified students gain access—not lowering expectations."

Oh, maybe they mean "admissions criteria" will stay the same, in the sense of the bare minimum eligibility? Like Algebra 1 in 8th for Blair or 1 year of foreign language in middle school for RMIB?

Yes, meeting bare minimum eligibility will get you into the proposed fake SMCS and IB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MCPS says this about central stop transportation. There are apparently no guarantees of a stop within walking distance. How is this possibly equitable? The programs will only be for kids whose parents can drive them to a central stop?

"According to MCPS Regulation EEA-RA, Student
Transportation, Section II.B.2, “Centralized bus
service, defined as transportation from a central
location such as a neighborhood elementary
school, to the program site, may be provided to
students attending specific programs as identi-
fied in the MCPS Options (Guide to Countywide
Programs) booklet, in accordance with Board
action, attendance areas, transportation services,
and funding levels. Parents/guardians are respon-
sible for students’ transportation to and from
centralized bus stops, whether or not there is an
appropriate walking route.” Central stops are
placed at MCPS schools and other government
facilities. Not all students will have a bus stop
within walking distance of their home."

CO has been reiterated in multiple occasions that "central stops" only include local HSs, and this is exactly the transportation model used in their transportation budget (i.e., one HS-HS bus between every two HSs in every region, no matter how many students one bus can carry).

[Anonymous]

Getting rid of a scarcity model and expanding access to programs seems like a good goal if we are going to have programs at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of a scarcity model and expanding access to programs seems like a good goal if we are going to have programs at all.

It's a great goal. But how they are saying they will implement it (with no new resources, no plans for recruiting or training teachers, no actual full curricula planned - they will only think about 8th grade first and then figure out 10th grade, etc - and no considerations about what happens when only the programs in the rich schools succeed) s incredibly stupid.

[Anonymous]

They removed the school-by-school breakdown of programs planned. The one on the website was from after they switched Damascus & QO, but before they moved magnets around a bit (e.g., Humanities to Whitman, Medical to Einstein in Region 1).

Unless I missed it earlier, they introduced the concept of Middle College as a theme, but without specifics as to the nature or locations.

They intend only 15 minutes of small-group Q&A at the tables after the canned presentation.

SMH...

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why they are so dead set on breaking everything about the DCC while claiming they are trying to replicate its successes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why they are so dead set on breaking everything about the DCC while claiming they are trying to replicate its successes.

Especially since they refuse to discuss with the community its assessment of the Consortia's successes or failures.

[Anonymous]

They used AI to write the FAQ, and somehow managed to add a spelling error while plagiarizing it

Page 1:
"Vision, Rational and Goals"

I have nothing further, Your Honor. The Prosecution rests.

Simply pathetic. And these are the people charged with educating our children.

[Anonymous]

"Will the new Regional Programs be lottery-based or criteria-based? Will a student be able to apply to an out-of-area region?

The new regional programs are expected to include both interest-based (lottery) and criteria-based program option."

This is the THIRD time they mentioned "criteria and lottery" and did NOT say that the criteria programs will have lottery admissions. They might be hiding the truth, they have bever said that criteria programs will have a lottery.

I will collect apologies in the quote comments below 👇

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would love for them to go into detail on the inequities in MCPS. Not just the supposed "inequities" that they are using to justify eliminating the consortia, but all the inequities.

Check out Matt Walsh's forthcoming documentary, "What Is An Equity?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why they are so dead set on breaking everything about the DCC while claiming they are trying to replicate its successes.

That's Equity (TM). DCC gets the same "equitable" treatment as the existing Countwide and SemiCountywide Magnet Programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No words on the lottery in criteria based programs?

Anonymous wrote:New slides: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PXEGp4xDGcnFZQ3aVA3TNF191YNU2tc3TgaWs2PM9rE/edit?slide=id.g39ec8c68b94_2_165#slide=id.g39ec8c68b94_2_165 15 minutes of questions planned in small groups, "feedback" collected on post it notes

New FAQ: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sYH8G9mVKZI0Bkm_-ZXoSszwRGnrsemE_ksF7DZR4fs/edit?usp=drivesdk

Answer to why they are rushing the program changes now: "The changes are happening now to address historical inequities and a scarcity model that limits access to high-demand programs for many students. The program analysis is being done concurrently with the boundary study (final decision expected March 2026) to provide families with a full picture of school assignments and program access at the same time."

They say this but honestly I don't believe it since it contradicts other things they've said:

" No. Excellence and equity go hand in hand. Admission criteria, curriculum standards, and accountability measures will remain in place. Expansion means more qualified students gain access—not lowering expectations."

Oh, maybe they mean "admissions criteria" will stay the same, in the sense of the bare minimum eligibility? Like Algebra 1 in 8th for Blair or 1 year of foreign language in middle school for RMIB?

Yes, meeting bare minimum eligibility will get you into the proposed fake SMCS and IB.

You have no way to know if this is true, and it's only even *possible* if the criteria-meeting demand for the program is lower than the size of the program.

[Anonymous]

Is there any new information in these documents?