MCPS to end areawide Blair Magnet and countywide Richard Montgomery's IB program

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: hiring good STEM teachers, I think aside from the pay, there needs to be a way to get STEM skilled folks trained to teach without making them get an Education degree.

In fact, there is:

https://www.montgomerycollege.edu/academics/liberal-arts-and-education/school-of-education/alternative-certification-effective-teachers.html

Am I reading correctly that it costs $15k to get this certification? That does not sound appealing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is bonkers. The regional program seems responsive to the concerns parents raise here all the time that high performing kids are shut out of the very few high performing programs. Now, a larger group of high performing kids will be able to learn with their high performing peers, with the speciality focus area piece available to try to equal out the number of high performing kids at each school. Seems like a good approach to me. As for the rarefied Blair offerings, kids can get those in college.

Exactly. HS is about exposure not specialization.

So why kill the existing program that gives kids the most exposure?

What exactly is the problem with keeping our outstanding cross-county programs AND reorganizing the school district into regions?

I would have thought this was a good solution too, but apparently it has already been tried and failed with IB programs.

How?

I don't know the details but apparently people think RMIB is way better than the regional IBs?

one only needs to look at the IBDP rate and the IB classes offered at the regional IBs compared to RMIB.

I believe the regional programs’ failure is because of mcps’s insistence to put them in schools with students have a reputation for unruliness. Better to stick with the home school than to be surrounded by disruptive students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: hiring good STEM teachers, I think aside from the pay, there needs to be a way to get STEM skilled folks trained to teach without making them get an Education degree.

If you happen to be at last Tuesday’s MCCPTA meeting, you’ll see Dr Taylor insists on no possibility of hiring of new teachers because of budget limit, and he doesn’t believe training is needed either. He claimed that many teachers had been having multiple certificates and “they are significantly under-utilized”.

A certificate is meaningless. I am certified in software. It means nothing.

There are very few teachers who can teach advanced STEM, and teach it well.

Who creates the math curriculum in the advanced math classes at Blair? Is it central office, or do the magnet teachers have more autonomy?

Blair magnet teachers used to have a great deal of freedom, and they created the curriculum based on many many years of experience dealing with the magnet kids and their own expertise. Now thinking about applying this curriculum to a very much diluted student body with a teacher lacking knowledge in that subject: it’s going to be a disaster to both side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: hiring good STEM teachers, I think aside from the pay, there needs to be a way to get STEM skilled folks trained to teach without making them get an Education degree.

If you happen to be at last Tuesday’s MCCPTA meeting, you’ll see Dr Taylor insists on no possibility of hiring of new teachers because of budget limit, and he doesn’t believe training is needed either. He claimed that many teachers had been having multiple certificates and “they are significantly under-utilized”.

A certificate is meaningless. I am certified in software. It means nothing.

There are very few teachers who can teach advanced STEM, and teach it well.

Who creates the math curriculum in the advanced math classes at Blair? Is it central office, or do the magnet teachers have more autonomy?

Blair magnet teachers used to have a great deal of freedom, and they created the curriculum based on many many years of experience dealing with the magnet kids and their own expertise. Now thinking about applying this curriculum to a very much diluted student body with a teacher lacking knowledge in that subject: it’s going to be a disaster to both side.

Exactly where I was headed.

MCPS cannot replicate Blair's STEM success across different regions, let alone five of them. There aren't enough qualified STEM teachers to do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: hiring good STEM teachers, I think aside from the pay, there needs to be a way to get STEM skilled folks trained to teach without making them get an Education degree.

If you happen to be at last Tuesday’s MCCPTA meeting, you’ll see Dr Taylor insists on no possibility of hiring of new teachers because of budget limit, and he doesn’t believe training is needed either. He claimed that many teachers had been having multiple certificates and “they are significantly under-utilized”.

A certificate is meaningless. I am certified in software. It means nothing.

There are very few teachers who can teach advanced STEM, and teach it well.

Who creates the math curriculum in the advanced math classes at Blair? Is it central office, or do the magnet teachers have more autonomy?

Blair magnet teachers used to have a great deal of freedom, and they created the curriculum based on many many years of experience dealing with the magnet kids and their own expertise. Now thinking about applying this curriculum to a very much diluted student body with a teacher lacking knowledge in that subject: it’s going to be a disaster to both side.

From how the boundaries are drawn, it looks like there will be strong teachers in whatever program. They should put the regional program in the HS with the best teachers in that subject. So the STEM program for region 1 should be at Blair, for example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is bonkers. The regional program seems responsive to the concerns parents raise here all the time that high performing kids are shut out of the very few high performing programs. Now, a larger group of high performing kids will be able to learn with their high performing peers, with the speciality focus area piece available to try to equal out the number of high performing kids at each school. Seems like a good approach to me. As for the rarefied Blair offerings, kids can get those in college.

Exactly. HS is about exposure not specialization.

So why kill the existing program that gives kids the most exposure?

What exactly is the problem with keeping our outstanding cross-county programs AND reorganizing the school district into regions?

I would have thought this was a good solution too, but apparently it has already been tried and failed with IB programs.

How?

I don't know the details but apparently people think RMIB is way better than the regional IBs?

one only needs to look at the IBDP rate and the IB classes offered at the regional IBs compared to RMIB.

I believe the regional programs’ failure is because of mcps’s insistence to put them in schools with students have a reputation for unruliness. Better to stick with the home school than to be surrounded by disruptive students.

MCPS is not going to put the IB regionals in high performing schools. They put the magnet IB program in RM 2 decades ago because RM was a failing school at the time, and to appease the Wootton parents whose neighborhoods were rezoned to RM. That was clearly a success, but it helps that the RM cluster neighbors Wootton and Churchill. RM cluster now has a lot of UMC families and high performing students. At the time, RM was in danger of closing due to low enrollment.

MCPS will try to do the same with the regional IBs. They aren't going to put the regional IBs in high performing schools. Look at where they put the regional IBs, and look at where most of the students are from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: hiring good STEM teachers, I think aside from the pay, there needs to be a way to get STEM skilled folks trained to teach without making them get an Education degree.

If you happen to be at last Tuesday’s MCCPTA meeting, you’ll see Dr Taylor insists on no possibility of hiring of new teachers because of budget limit, and he doesn’t believe training is needed either. He claimed that many teachers had been having multiple certificates and “they are significantly under-utilized”.

A certificate is meaningless. I am certified in software. It means nothing.

There are very few teachers who can teach advanced STEM, and teach it well.

Who creates the math curriculum in the advanced math classes at Blair? Is it central office, or do the magnet teachers have more autonomy?

Blair magnet teachers used to have a great deal of freedom, and they created the curriculum based on many many years of experience dealing with the magnet kids and their own expertise. Now thinking about applying this curriculum to a very much diluted student body with a teacher lacking knowledge in that subject: it’s going to be a disaster to both side.

From how the boundaries are drawn, it looks like there will be strong teachers in whatever program. They should put the regional program in the HS with the best teachers in that subject. So the STEM program for region 1 should be at Blair, for example.

Not really. Region #1 and #4 will be especially hard to train and maintain qualified teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: hiring good STEM teachers, I think aside from the pay, there needs to be a way to get STEM skilled folks trained to teach without making them get an Education degree.

If you happen to be at last Tuesday’s MCCPTA meeting, you’ll see Dr Taylor insists on no possibility of hiring of new teachers because of budget limit, and he doesn’t believe training is needed either. He claimed that many teachers had been having multiple certificates and “they are significantly under-utilized”.

🤣

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: hiring good STEM teachers, I think aside from the pay, there needs to be a way to get STEM skilled folks trained to teach without making them get an Education degree.

If you happen to be at last Tuesday’s MCCPTA meeting, you’ll see Dr Taylor insists on no possibility of hiring of new teachers because of budget limit, and he doesn’t believe training is needed either. He claimed that many teachers had been having multiple certificates and “they are significantly under-utilized”.

A certificate is meaningless. I am certified in software. It means nothing.

There are very few teachers who can teach advanced STEM, and teach it well.

Who creates the math curriculum in the advanced math classes at Blair? Is it central office, or do the magnet teachers have more autonomy?

Blair magnet teachers used to have a great deal of freedom, and they created the curriculum based on many many years of experience dealing with the magnet kids and their own expertise. Now thinking about applying this curriculum to a very much diluted student body with a teacher lacking knowledge in that subject: it’s going to be a disaster to both side.

From how the boundaries are drawn, it looks like there will be strong teachers in whatever program. They should put the regional program in the HS with the best teachers in that subject. So the STEM program for region 1 should be at Blair, for example.

Well of course the region 1 STEM program will be Blair, they've already said that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: hiring good STEM teachers, I think aside from the pay, there needs to be a way to get STEM skilled folks trained to teach without making them get an Education degree.

If you happen to be at last Tuesday’s MCCPTA meeting, you’ll see Dr Taylor insists on no possibility of hiring of new teachers because of budget limit, and he doesn’t believe training is needed either. He claimed that many teachers had been having multiple certificates and “they are significantly under-utilized”.

A certificate is meaningless. I am certified in software. It means nothing.

There are very few teachers who can teach advanced STEM, and teach it well.

Who creates the math curriculum in the advanced math classes at Blair? Is it central office, or do the magnet teachers have more autonomy?

Blair magnet teachers used to have a great deal of freedom, and they created the curriculum based on many many years of experience dealing with the magnet kids and their own expertise. Now thinking about applying this curriculum to a very much diluted student body with a teacher lacking knowledge in that subject: it’s going to be a disaster to both side.

From how the boundaries are drawn, it looks like there will be strong teachers in whatever program. They should put the regional program in the HS with the best teachers in that subject. So the STEM program for region 1 should be at Blair, for example.

Not really. Region #1 and #4 will be especially hard to train and maintain qualified teachers.

Why is that? I’m pretty happy with Region 1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: hiring good STEM teachers, I think aside from the pay, there needs to be a way to get STEM skilled folks trained to teach without making them get an Education degree.

If you happen to be at last Tuesday’s MCCPTA meeting, you’ll see Dr Taylor insists on no possibility of hiring of new teachers because of budget limit, and he doesn’t believe training is needed either. He claimed that many teachers had been having multiple certificates and “they are significantly under-utilized”.

A certificate is meaningless. I am certified in software. It means nothing.

There are very few teachers who can teach advanced STEM, and teach it well.

Who creates the math curriculum in the advanced math classes at Blair? Is it central office, or do the magnet teachers have more autonomy?

Blair magnet teachers used to have a great deal of freedom, and they created the curriculum based on many many years of experience dealing with the magnet kids and their own expertise. Now thinking about applying this curriculum to a very much diluted student body with a teacher lacking knowledge in that subject: it’s going to be a disaster to both side.

From how the boundaries are drawn, it looks like there will be strong teachers in whatever program. They should put the regional program in the HS with the best teachers in that subject. So the STEM program for region 1 should be at Blair, for example.

Not really. Region #1 and #4 will be especially hard to train and maintain qualified teachers.

Why is that? I’m pretty happy with Region 1

I meant to say region #2 and #5. It’s going to create large in-equality for these two regions:

Region two: James Hubert Blake and Springbrook in Silver Spring, Paint Branch in Burtonsville, and Sherwood in Sandy Springs

Region five: Crown and Gaithersburg in Gaithersburg, Col. Zadok Magruder in Rockville, Damascus and Watkins Mill in Wheaton

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can imagine a scenario where a rigorous SMCS program on the level of Blair's evolves at Wooton. Blair's SMCS will become honors-for-all, and eventually fall from there. Blair's magnet was started to bring excellence to the lowest performing high school in the county.

Taylor's plan is problematic for Blair.

What on earth makes you think Blair's SMCS will become honors for all?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is bonkers. The regional program seems responsive to the concerns parents raise here all the time that high performing kids are shut out of the very few high performing programs. Now, a larger group of high performing kids will be able to learn with their high performing peers, with the speciality focus area piece available to try to equal out the number of high performing kids at each school. Seems like a good approach to me. As for the rarefied Blair offerings, kids can get those in college.

Exactly. HS is about exposure not specialization.

So why kill the existing program that gives kids the most exposure?

What exactly is the problem with keeping our outstanding cross-county programs AND reorganizing the school district into regions?

I would have thought this was a good solution too, but apparently it has already been tried and failed with IB programs.

How?

I don't know the details but apparently people think RMIB is way better than the regional IBs?

Even if RMIB is better than the regionals (that's to be expected), doesn't prove that the regionals have failed.

I guess the theory is that the regionals would do better if the top students weren’t all flocking to RMIB.

The kids I know that went to the regionals weren’t significantly worse than the RM kids. But the regional programs just were not good. It turns out you can’t just decide to run an IB program and have it magically appear fully formed without putting a lot of expertise and resources into developing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What can be done to better support MCPS teachers and teaching in all schools???

Cut the bloat in admin, cut the central micromanagement, give teachers more autonomy, pay them more.

Amen, sister.

[Anonymous]

The regions seem pretty gerrymandered. If the goal was to minimize busing of students, these are really weird boundaries. Whitman in with Silver Spring, for instance.