Magnets, Regions, and the Future of MCPS Gifted Kids

[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?

Are you serious? You're going to pick one uncommon route to try to disprove the statement? Genius.

[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.

They cannot defend their new transportation model given it's only considering HS to HS transportation, which literally and practically immediately declares inequity by its nature. Even with this extremely rudimentary supply, the transportation cost is estimated to be $1.5 million/year operational cost + $5 million one-time additional bus purchase cost. As a contrast, the staffing cost is estimated to be $4 million/year (linearly scaling-up using their most recent numbers in the BOE presentation slides).

[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?

Are you serious? You're going to pick one uncommon route to try to disprove the statement? Genius.

lol. Goes to show, just because people have a little money or high test scores, does not mean they are intelligent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

But it will cost more money and they are unwilling to put their money where their mouth is when it comes to equity. So they just slap an equity label on inequity.

[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?

Are you serious? You're going to pick one uncommon route to try to disprove the statement? Genius.

There are three schools that predominantly feed to the Blair magnet. Churchill, Wootton, and Blair. Hence it is not an uncommon route.

[Anonymous]

So commutes are too long now but are the same under the regions as they are under the current 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.

This is objectively false and is a weird thing to be so wrong about. Also, there are no commute times yet for many of the school to school commutes since many schools don’t have magnets and aren’t in the NEC or DCC.

The person upthread who said this discussion is myopic was right.

[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.

This is objectively false and is a weird thing to be so wrong about. Also, there are no commute times yet for many of the school to school commutes since many schools don’t have magnets and aren’t in the NEC or DCC.

The person upthread who said this discussion is myopic was right.

From Northwood or Einstein to Whitman is not a reasonable commute.

[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?

Are you serious? You're going to pick one uncommon route to try to disprove the statement? Genius.

Its the low income students that will be the primary ones commuting. They may only have MCPS transportation or public transportation. Not an easy commute.

[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.

This is objectively false and is a weird thing to be so wrong about. Also, there are no commute times yet for many of the school to school commutes since many schools don’t have magnets and aren’t in the NEC or DCC.

The person upthread who said this discussion is myopic was right.

From Northwood or Einstein to Whitman is not a reasonable commute.

But Churchill to Blair is?

[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.

This is objectively false and is a weird thing to be so wrong about. Also, there are no commute times yet for many of the school to school commutes since many schools don’t have magnets and aren’t in the NEC or DCC.

The person upthread who said this discussion is myopic was right.

From Northwood or Einstein to Whitman is not a reasonable commute.

And ketchup is not a good condiment.

How is your comment responsive to what you are responding to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is so hilariously myopic. There are more schools in MCPS than just Whitman and DCC.

I could easily whine, "why does your DCC kid get to have school choice when mine has to stay at our high FARMS school if they don't get into RMIB/Blair?"

But I don't. Because I'm not a selfish toddler.

People are posting about how the regional program model will affect their own kids. I don't pretend to speak for other families, that's why I don't post about how families in other parts of the county will be impacted.

I'm not going to shut up because you hate the DCC and call us names in an effort to shut down advocacy.

But that's not what you're doing. Your "advocacy" comes at the expense of opportunities for other kids while deriding "equity." You are asking for exactly what you are mocking.

+100 People are advocating for equity they are complaining about Whitman and the DCC as though those are the only schools and kids that MCPS Central Office must consider.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is so hilariously myopic. There are more schools in MCPS than just Whitman and DCC.

I could easily whine, "why does your DCC kid get to have school choice when mine has to stay at our high FARMS school if they don't get into RMIB/Blair?"

But I don't. Because I'm not a selfish toddler.

People are posting about how the regional program model will affect their own kids. I don't pretend to speak for other families, that's why I don't post about how families in other parts of the county will be impacted.

I'm not going to shut up because you hate the DCC and call us names in an effort to shut down advocacy.

But that's not what you're doing. Your "advocacy" comes at the expense of opportunities for other kids while deriding "equity." You are asking for exactly what you are mocking.

+100 People are advocating for equity they are complaining about Whitman and the DCC as though those are the only schools and kids that MCPS Central Office must consider.

Gmafb. Region 1 is composed of Whitman, BCC and three DCC schools. I get it is easier for everyone if DCC families stay quiet, but we aren't going to be doing that so get used to it.

[Anonymous]

Fyi I find it telling that when I asked what specific things DCC families have advocated for that take things away from other kids, there was no answer. There was name-calling and vague attacks.

[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.

This is objectively false and is a weird thing to be so wrong about. Also, there are no commute times yet for many of the school to school commutes since many schools don’t have magnets and aren’t in the NEC or DCC.

The person upthread who said this discussion is myopic was right.

From Northwood or Einstein to Whitman is not a reasonable commute.

But Churchill to Blair is?

It would be a nightmare. Beltway is backed up in the morning as are side/main roads. Now do that 2-4 times a day.