Parents of current 7th graders - what do you think about the 6 regional magnets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are all regional program names fake magnets , except humanities, stem and computer science these main ones?

Be careful. MCPS is using the names of established magnets and applying the same name to the new programs, but in actuality, the new programs are NOT the same as the current programs.

No program specifics were provided in the mailer, so middle school families don't have official visibility into this. The mailer claims only that new programs are coming, and they are going to be accessible and convenient while also providing exceptional local high schools.

Sounds too good to be true, given its history. MCPS likes to market, but can't deliver the goods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is going to be rough for all students in the first year of rollout, actually probably the first several years. It's being rushed and what they have produced shows that they really don't know what they are doing. Rather than phasing it, they are going to roll everything out at once. I feel very bad for current 7th graders who will be the first guinea pigs.

+1 I had hoped that my 1st grader would be okay but now I am wondering if they can get anything decent together by the time she starts HS. My guess is no. Hopefully they won't screw up our home school too much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is going to be rough for all students in the first year of rollout, actually probably the first several years. It's being rushed and what they have produced shows that they really don't know what they are doing. Rather than phasing it, they are going to roll everything out at once. I feel very bad for current 7th graders who will be the first guinea pigs.

+1 I had hoped that my 1st grader would be okay but now I am wondering if they can get anything decent together by the time she starts HS. My guess is no. Hopefully they won't screw up our home school too much.

Just to put it in perspective, I have a 9th grader and everything you have now is completely different than what we had in 1st grade. You have different ELA curriculum, different math curriculum, you will have different math pathways, access to magnets is different, district communication is way different. You also have some different assessments. We did not even have parentvue. We basically got a class email from the teacher once a month and a pile of papers/projects sent home twice a year. All this to say you can’t predict what anything will look like that far out.

[Anonymous]

I have an academically strong 7th grader and I support the new programs. Here’s why.

According to the October 3rd I Hate Politics podcast, when the popular SMCS programs began at Blair and Poolesville High Schools in the 1980s, the organizers had just 20 days to implement the program from scratch. The success of the program was attributed to focusing on gifted and talented testing. They accepted students as low as 54 percentile in academic performance and were still successful.

In contrast, MCPS has allocated two whole academic years, has historical information t guide them and has since shifted towards focusing instead on academic performance for criteria-based programs. I have no reason to believe that it isn’t possible to pull this off successfully.

Many parents and teachers point to MCPS in the past. However, I am confident in Taylor’s leadership so far. It is clear to me that he is listening and making intelligent, well thought-out choices for our district. He answered many of the questions asked here in the November 19th meeting with BOE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is going to be rough for all students in the first year of rollout, actually probably the first several years. It's being rushed and what they have produced shows that they really don't know what they are doing. Rather than phasing it, they are going to roll everything out at once. I feel very bad for current 7th graders who will be the first guinea pigs.

+1 I had hoped that my 1st grader would be okay but now I am wondering if they can get anything decent together by the time she starts HS. My guess is no. Hopefully they won't screw up our home school too much.

Just to put it in perspective, I have a 9th grader and everything you have now is completely different than what we had in 1st grade. You have different ELA curriculum, different math curriculum, you will have different math pathways, access to magnets is different, district communication is way different. You also have some different assessments. We did not even have parentvue. We basically got a class email from the teacher once a month and a pile of papers/projects sent home twice a year. All this to say you can’t predict what anything will look like that far out.

Look at the implementation of the TWI program. https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/detail.aspx?id=1600 lots of issues several years out. My concern is the sheer amount of stuff they want to implement. It's too much. Also, the number of changes you describe are not a good thing IME. It just seems like MCPS is constantly chasing the shiny new thing and schools are constantly scrambling to implement them without adequate resources. I was so confused when DC was in kindergarten about various issues and now I realize it is because they just implemented CKLA and it takes a lot of time to figure things out. How long until they decide this one doesn't work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have an academically strong 7th grader and I support the new programs. Here’s why.

According to the October 3rd I Hate Politics podcast, when the popular SMCS programs began at Blair and Poolesville High Schools in the 1980s, the organizers had just 20 days to implement the program from scratch. The success of the program was attributed to focusing on gifted and talented testing. They accepted students as low as 54 percentile in academic performance and were still successful.

In contrast, MCPS has allocated two whole academic years, has historical information t guide them and has since shifted towards focusing instead on academic performance for criteria-based programs. I have no reason to believe that it isn’t possible to pull this off successfully.

Many parents and teachers point to MCPS in the past. However, I am confident in Taylor’s leadership so far. It is clear to me that he is listening and making intelligent, well thought-out choices for our district. He answered many of the questions asked here in the November 19th meeting with BOE.

I admit I haven't listened to the podcast, but Poolesville SMCS opened in 2006 with the support of the Blair program. And the Blair program opened in 1985, but the program initial development started with a survey presented in 1982 followed by a task force that built all the plans before opening 3 years later. So opening a single magnet at Blair was a three year process and now they are planning to open new programs in every high school over less than two years. Also, it's great that Blair focused on gifted testing, but the county no longer uses gifted testing in their criteria.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an academically strong 7th grader and I support the new programs. Here’s why.

According to the October 3rd I Hate Politics podcast, when the popular SMCS programs began at Blair and Poolesville High Schools in the 1980s, the organizers had just 20 days to implement the program from scratch. The success of the program was attributed to focusing on gifted and talented testing. They accepted students as low as 54 percentile in academic performance and were still successful.

In contrast, MCPS has allocated two whole academic years, has historical information t guide them and has since shifted towards focusing instead on academic performance for criteria-based programs. I have no reason to believe that it isn’t possible to pull this off successfully.

Many parents and teachers point to MCPS in the past. However, I am confident in Taylor’s leadership so far. It is clear to me that he is listening and making intelligent, well thought-out choices for our district. He answered many of the questions asked here in the November 19th meeting with BOE.

I admit I haven't listened to the podcast, but Poolesville SMCS opened in 2006 with the support of the Blair program. And the Blair program opened in 1985, but the program initial development started with a survey presented in 1982 followed by a task force that built all the plans before opening 3 years later. So opening a single magnet at Blair was a three year process and now they are planning to open new programs in every high school over less than two years. Also, it's great that Blair focused on gifted testing, but the county no longer uses gifted testing in their criteria.

This part is the most I worry the most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an academically strong 7th grader and I support the new programs. Here’s why.

According to the October 3rd I Hate Politics podcast, when the popular SMCS programs began at Blair and Poolesville High Schools in the 1980s, the organizers had just 20 days to implement the program from scratch. The success of the program was attributed to focusing on gifted and talented testing. They accepted students as low as 54 percentile in academic performance and were still successful.

In contrast, MCPS has allocated two whole academic years, has historical information t guide them and has since shifted towards focusing instead on academic performance for criteria-based programs. I have no reason to believe that it isn’t possible to pull this off successfully.

Many parents and teachers point to MCPS in the past. However, I am confident in Taylor’s leadership so far. It is clear to me that he is listening and making intelligent, well thought-out choices for our district. He answered many of the questions asked here in the November 19th meeting with BOE.

I admit I haven't listened to the podcast, but Poolesville SMCS opened in 2006 with the support of the Blair program. And the Blair program opened in 1985, but the program initial development started with a survey presented in 1982 followed by a task force that built all the plans before opening 3 years later. So opening a single magnet at Blair was a three year process and now they are planning to open new programs in every high school over less than two years. Also, it's great that Blair focused on gifted testing, but the county no longer uses gifted testing in their criteria.

This +1. The pp that this post responded to must not listen to that podcast carefully, or intentionally trying to spread wrong perspectives. Rome is not built in one day, nor did these two SMCS programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are all regional program names fake magnets , except humanities, stem and computer science these main ones?

Be careful. MCPS is using the names of established magnets and applying the same name to the new programs, but in actuality, the new programs are NOT the same as the current programs.

No program specifics were provided in the mailer, so middle school families don't have official visibility into this. The mailer claims only that new programs are coming, and they are going to be accessible and convenient while also providing exceptional local high schools.

Sounds too good to be true, given its history. MCPS likes to market, but can't deliver the goods.

Not SMCS...they changed the name to STEM highlighting that no one should think they are the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an academically strong 7th grader and I support the new programs. Here’s why.

According to the October 3rd I Hate Politics podcast, when the popular SMCS programs began at Blair and Poolesville High Schools in the 1980s, the organizers had just 20 days to implement the program from scratch. The success of the program was attributed to focusing on gifted and talented testing. They accepted students as low as 54 percentile in academic performance and were still successful.

In contrast, MCPS has allocated two whole academic years, has historical information t guide them and has since shifted towards focusing instead on academic performance for criteria-based programs. I have no reason to believe that it isn’t possible to pull this off successfully.

Many parents and teachers point to MCPS in the past. However, I am confident in Taylor’s leadership so far. It is clear to me that he is listening and making intelligent, well thought-out choices for our district. He answered many of the questions asked here in the November 19th meeting with BOE.

I admit I haven't listened to the podcast, but Poolesville SMCS opened in 2006 with the support of the Blair program. And the Blair program opened in 1985, but the program initial development started with a survey presented in 1982 followed by a task force that built all the plans before opening 3 years later. So opening a single magnet at Blair was a three year process and now they are planning to open new programs in every high school over less than two years. Also, it's great that Blair focused on gifted testing, but the county no longer uses gifted testing in their criteria.

This +1. The pp that this post responded to must not listen to that podcast carefully, or intentionally trying to spread wrong perspectives. Rome is not built in one day, nor did these two SMCS programs.

Its just another indication that these programs will be quite similar to the traditional HS path with a few extra electives and/or required classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What the title says -

Which high school is your kid zoned for and what do you think about the 6 regional magnets and the placement of the program your kid would be interested in?

WJ/Woodward, and my thoughts are: 🤢🤮 it's horrible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What the title says -

Which high school is your kid zoned for and what do you think about the 6 regional magnets and the placement of the program your kid would be interested in?

WJ/Woodward, and my thoughts are: 🤢🤮 it's horrible

I think WJ/Woodward is getting a bad deal with respect to IB. They are now being assigned to the regional program at Kennedy even though RM and BCC would both be closer. Wasn't the whole point of the model to provide programming closer to home?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What the title says -

Which high school is your kid zoned for and what do you think about the 6 regional magnets and the placement of the program your kid would be interested in?

WJ/Woodward, and my thoughts are: 🤢🤮 it's horrible

I think WJ/Woodward is getting a bad deal with respect to IB. They are now being assigned to the regional program at Kennedy even though RM and BCC would both be closer. Wasn't the whole point of the model to provide programming closer to home?

What the BOE didn't want to tell you is that they're trying to also balance FARMS and racial demographics with these new regions too. They just don't want to say that out loud in this anti-DEI climate we're in under Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What the title says -

Which high school is your kid zoned for and what do you think about the 6 regional magnets and the placement of the program your kid would be interested in?

WJ/Woodward, and my thoughts are: 🤢🤮 it's horrible

I think WJ/Woodward is getting a bad deal with respect to IB. They are now being assigned to the regional program at Kennedy even though RM and BCC would both be closer. Wasn't the whole point of the model to provide programming closer to home?

What the BOE didn't want to tell you is that they're trying to also balance FARMS and racial demographics with these new regions too. They just don't want to say that out loud in this anti-DEI climate we're in under Trump.

By switching QO from region 6 to region 5, they are clearly showing that they don’t GAF to FARM balance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What the title says -

Which high school is your kid zoned for and what do you think about the 6 regional magnets and the placement of the program your kid would be interested in?

WJ/Woodward, and my thoughts are: 🤢🤮 it's horrible

I think WJ/Woodward is getting a bad deal with respect to IB. They are now being assigned to the regional program at Kennedy even though RM and BCC would both be closer. Wasn't the whole point of the model to provide programming closer to home?

What the BOE didn't want to tell you is that they're trying to also balance FARMS and racial demographics with these new regions too. They just don't want to say that out loud in this anti-DEI climate we're in under Trump.

By switching QO from region 6 to region 5, they are clearly showing that they don’t GAF to FARM balance.

They care in some regions more than others. But there's a reason they're didn't group BCC, Walter Johnson and Woodward together and instead split them between different regions that have higher FARMS and minority populations.