Another article about the magnet programs in Washington Post

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

When the Metis report covered only one core value equity, you bet people are concerned. Closing the gap should never be the only goal of a school system. MCPS is obsessed with window dressing a deeply rooted problem. No matter people are skeptical of their motives.

Either you haven't read the whole report, or you and I read different reports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
we are asking just how mcps proposes to make changes to only admit "qualified" students, including those who don't test high, because that is the crux of it.

MCPS hasn't proposed to do anything at all. MCPS paid a consultant to do a report that made recommendations.

Also, why do people (I don't know whether it's just you, or other people too) keep using the term "urms"? The consultant's report doesn't use the term. And people aren't using the term "orms", which would be the logical corollary.

Presumably, MCPS hired this company to do the study because they felt that certain groups weren't represented enough. MCPS is focused on closing the achievement gap. Put two and two together. It usually equals 4.

Completely wrong...

This whole study spun out of the JEE policy on how students transfer from school to school. The board wanted to do away with sibling preference in the immersion program while at the same time BCC PTA was unhappy about immersion kids continuing on to the highschool after immersion ended in middle school. When they came out with the proposed changes, there was a huge back lash from several different communities (including those in other magnets) that would be impacted. This prompted the board to ask whether it was worthwhile to step back and look at all the "choice" programs and examine whether they were "achieving their original intent" since inception. So it originally had nothing to do with the test in magnets.

Great, so no need to change the test-in magnet process.

So, why are some people saying we should include "non cognitive" abilities and what not in the test in magnets?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Presumably, MCPS hired this company to do the study because they felt that certain groups weren't represented enough. MCPS is focused on closing the achievement gap. Put two and two together. It usually equals 4.

Why do you presume that?

I presume that MCPS commissioned a comprehensive study of the wide variety of choice and other special academic programs that Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) offers, with the goal of determining if these programs effectively advance the MCPS mission, purpose, values, and core competencies. The reason I presume this is because that's why MCPS says they commissioned the study.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/choice/report.aspx

Yes, yes. We get it. But the study was completed and 6 of the 8 findings specifically reference racial or socioeconomic equity, equality, or diversity. Based on these findings, the recommendations sections goes on to suggest using "group specific benchmarks."

How are parents supposed to react to that? What would that look like? Even if it doesn't mean lowering standards, the flip side of that is just as bad, which is higher standards for certain groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Presumably, MCPS hired this company to do the study because they felt that certain groups weren't represented enough. MCPS is focused on closing the achievement gap. Put two and two together. It usually equals 4.

Why do you presume that?

I presume that MCPS commissioned a comprehensive study of the wide variety of choice and other special academic programs that Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) offers, with the goal of determining if these programs effectively advance the MCPS mission, purpose, values, and core competencies. The reason I presume this is because that's why MCPS says they commissioned the study.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/choice/report.aspx

New PP, I understand your concern and/or problem with some of the findings but I would argue you are overreacting. Metis has their own bias and agenda which isn't necessarily the same as MCPS'. MCPS isn't just going to immediately sign off on every suggestion the study has nor could they... As MANY posters have already stated some would be illegal! Metis has done this all over the country and now two districts are alike and never will be. I think it would be more constructive at this stage to instead of attack MCPS for something they had no part, to advocate for the changes you would (or wouldn't) like to see. Arguing over a message board about whether MCPS has some kindof conspiracy with Metis is silliness.


When the Metis report covered only one core value equity, you bet people are concerned. Closing the gap should never be the only goal of a school system. MCPS is obsessed with window dressing a deeply rooted problem. No matter people are skeptical of their motives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, yes. We get it. But the study was completed and 6 of the 8 findings specifically reference racial or socioeconomic equity, equality, or diversity. Based on these findings, the recommendations sections goes on to suggest using "group specific benchmarks."

How are parents supposed to react to that? What would that look like? Even if it doesn't mean lowering standards, the flip side of that is just as bad, which is higher standards for certain groups.

By providing your comments in the comment form at the bottom of the web page here: http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/choice/report.aspx

[Anonymous]

New PP, I understand your concern and/or problem with some of the findings but I would argue you are overreacting. Metis has their own bias and agenda which isn't necessarily the same as MCPS'. MCPS isn't just going to immediately sign off on every suggestion the study has nor could they... As MANY posters have already stated some would be illegal! Metis has done this all over the country and now two districts are alike and never will be. I think it would be more constructive at this stage to instead of attack MCPS for something they had no part, to advocate for the changes you would (or wouldn't) like to see. Arguing over a message board about whether MCPS has some kindof conspiracy with Metis is silliness.


When the Metis report covered only one core value equity, you bet people are concerned. Closing the gap should never be the only goal of a school system. MCPS is obsessed with window dressing a deeply rooted problem. No matter people are skeptical of their motives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Presumably, MCPS hired this company to do the study because they felt that certain groups weren't represented enough. MCPS is focused on closing the achievement gap. Put two and two together. It usually equals 4.

Why do you presume that?

I presume that MCPS commissioned a comprehensive study of the wide variety of choice and other special academic programs that Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) offers, with the goal of determining if these programs effectively advance the MCPS mission, purpose, values, and core competencies. The reason I presume this is because that's why MCPS says they commissioned the study.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/choice/report.aspx

Yes, yes. We get it. But the study was completed and 6 of the 8 findings specifically reference racial or socioeconomic equity, equality, or diversity. Based on these findings, the recommendations sections goes on to suggest using "group specific benchmarks."

How are parents supposed to react to that? What would that look like? Even if it doesn't mean lowering standards, the flip side of that is just as bad, which is higher standards for certain groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Presumably, MCPS hired this company to do the study because they felt that certain groups weren't represented enough. MCPS is focused on closing the achievement gap. Put two and two together. It usually equals 4.

Why do you presume that?

I presume that MCPS commissioned a comprehensive study of the wide variety of choice and other special academic programs that Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) offers, with the goal of determining if these programs effectively advance the MCPS mission, purpose, values, and core competencies. The reason I presume this is because that's why MCPS says they commissioned the study.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/choice/report.aspx

Yes, yes. We get it. But the study was completed and 6 of the 8 findings specifically reference racial or socioeconomic equity, equality, or diversity. Based on these findings, the recommendations sections goes on to suggest using "group specific benchmarks."

How are parents supposed to react to that? What would that look like? Even if it doesn't mean lowering standards, the flip side of that is just as bad, which is higher standards for certain groups.

I'll tell you how I reacted... I read it, chuckled and said she has no idea what county she is dealing with... that will never happened...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Presumably, MCPS hired this company to do the study because they felt that certain groups weren't represented enough. MCPS is focused on closing the achievement gap. Put two and two together. It usually equals 4.

Why do you presume that?

I presume that MCPS commissioned a comprehensive study of the wide variety of choice and other special academic programs that Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) offers, with the goal of determining if these programs effectively advance the MCPS mission, purpose, values, and core competencies. The reason I presume this is because that's why MCPS says they commissioned the study.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/choice/report.aspx

New PP, I understand your concern and/or problem with some of the findings but I would argue you are overreacting. Metis has their own bias and agenda which isn't necessarily the same as MCPS'. MCPS isn't just going to immediately sign off on every suggestion the study has nor could they... As MANY posters have already stated some would be illegal! Metis has done this all over the country and now two districts are alike and never will be. I think it would be more constructive at this stage to instead of attack MCPS for something they had no part, to advocate for the changes you would (or wouldn't) like to see. Arguing over a message board about whether MCPS has some kindof conspiracy with Metis is silliness.


When the Metis report covered only one core value equity, you bet people are concerned. Closing the gap should never be the only goal of a school system. MCPS is obsessed with window dressing a deeply rooted problem. No matter people are skeptical of their motives.

It is indeed silly to argue here. But MCPS has the feedback portal and people should absolutely be writing in there. The BOE needs to hear. I heard from some veteran parent on the county PTA said something very insightful. The BOE is very conflict avoidant. If you don't like the way it is trending, complain. Ultimately the BOE are politicians. The parents who are passionate about gifted talented education need to run for BOE or vote for BOE members who care only closing the gap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When the Metis report covered only one core value equity, you bet people are concerned. Closing the gap should never be the only goal of a school system. MCPS is obsessed with window dressing a deeply rooted problem. No matter people are skeptical of their motives.

Either you haven't read the whole report, or you and I read different reports.

What other core value did Metis mention? I surely didn't see learning as one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Presumably, MCPS hired this company to do the study because they felt that certain groups weren't represented enough. MCPS is focused on closing the achievement gap. Put two and two together. It usually equals 4.

Why do you presume that?

I presume that MCPS commissioned a comprehensive study of the wide variety of choice and other special academic programs that Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) offers, with the goal of determining if these programs effectively advance the MCPS mission, purpose, values, and core competencies. The reason I presume this is because that's why MCPS says they commissioned the study.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/info/choice/report.aspx

New PP, I understand your concern and/or problem with some of the findings but I would argue you are overreacting. Metis has their own bias and agenda which isn't necessarily the same as MCPS'. MCPS isn't just going to immediately sign off on every suggestion the study has nor could they... As MANY posters have already stated some would be illegal! Metis has done this all over the country and now two districts are alike and never will be. I think it would be more constructive at this stage to instead of attack MCPS for something they had no part, to advocate for the changes you would (or wouldn't) like to see. Arguing over a message board about whether MCPS has some kindof conspiracy with Metis is silliness.


When the Metis report covered only one core value equity, you bet people are concerned. Closing the gap should never be the only goal of a school system. MCPS is obsessed with window dressing a deeply rooted problem. No matter people are skeptical of their motives.

It is indeed silly to argue here. But MCPS has the feedback portal and people should absolutely be writing in there. The BOE needs to hear. I heard from some veteran parent on the county PTA said something very insightful. The BOE is very conflict avoidant. If you don't like the way it is trending, complain. Ultimately the BOE are politicians. The parents who are passionate about gifted talented education need to run for BOE or vote for BOE members who care only closing the gap.

I meant BOE members who care NOT only closing the gap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When the Metis report covered only one core value equity, you bet people are concerned. Closing the gap should never be the only goal of a school system. MCPS is obsessed with window dressing a deeply rooted problem. No matter people are skeptical of their motives.

Either you haven't read the whole report, or you and I read different reports.

What other core value did Metis mention? I surely didn't see learning as one.

I guess that we did read different reports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When the Metis report covered only one core value equity, you bet people are concerned. Closing the gap should never be the only goal of a school system. MCPS is obsessed with window dressing a deeply rooted problem. No matter people are skeptical of their motives.

Either you haven't read the whole report, or you and I read different reports.

What other core value did Metis mention? I surely didn't see learning as one.

I guess that we did read different reports.

Enlighten us, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It is indeed silly to argue here. But MCPS has the feedback portal and people should absolutely be writing in there. The BOE needs to hear. I heard from some veteran parent on the county PTA said something very insightful. The BOE is very conflict avoidant. If you don't like the way it is trending, complain. Ultimately the BOE are politicians. The parents who are passionate about gifted talented education need to run for BOE or vote for BOE members who care only closing the gap.

They should do that. But they don't. They complain and complain and complain and don't run.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When the Metis report covered only one core value equity, you bet people are concerned. Closing the gap should never be the only goal of a school system. MCPS is obsessed with window dressing a deeply rooted problem. No matter people are skeptical of their motives.

Either you haven't read the whole report, or you and I read different reports.

What other core value did Metis mention? I surely didn't see learning as one.

I guess that we did read different reports.

Enlighten us, please.

Sure! Here is the one that I read: http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/info/choice/ChoiceStudyReport-Version2-20160307.pdf

I have also provided my comments to MCPS. Have you?