Interview of MCPS program analysis leaders

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoa. Jeannie Franklin admitted that schools with existing programs won't get any new staff or resources.

Instead, the bulk of new resources will go to schools getting magnets for the first time, which means Wooton, Churchill, WJ, and BCC.

BCC is not getting a magnet for the first time. Or rather, the IB program that already exists is just going to become the "magnet".

It will need more teachers

I thought none of the programs are getting new teachers, just perhaps some extra training.

If they don't change BCC boundaries but put in a new criteria based program that adds 200 students from other schools, their staff allocation will increase and other schools' staff allocations decrease.

it's really not a new program since it already exists. I don't know how many kids are in it, but I imagine that they'd just restrict the number of kids from BCC to have kids from other schools. It seems like the idea overall (with the no new teachers thing) is to just utilize resources that already exist at the locations.

It’s sort of a new program and sort of not. RMIB has higher level cohorted pre-IB courses in 9th/10th. BCC does not. RMIB magnet kids do the full diploma. BCC kids can choose to do the full diploma without any kind of application or criteria, or kids can just take IB courses of interest without doing the full diploma. No one has indicated what the plan will be with BCC under this new system. Particularly when BCC doesn’t really do much IB with 9th and 10th currently, kids will be joining a program that has minimal infrastructure until 11th/12th.

DP. It is definitely a new program. It will have 9th and 10th grade classes like RMIB has. It will have out of bounds spot. It will be much better than what is offered now.

Source? And who is providing that 9th/10th grade curriculum and training teachers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoa. Jeannie Franklin admitted that schools with existing programs won't get any new staff or resources.

Instead, the bulk of new resources will go to schools getting magnets for the first time, which means Wooton, Churchill, WJ, and BCC.

BCC is not getting a magnet for the first time. Or rather, the IB program that already exists is just going to become the "magnet".

It will need more teachers

I thought none of the programs are getting new teachers, just perhaps some extra training.

If they don't change BCC boundaries but put in a new criteria based program that adds 200 students from other schools, their staff allocation will increase and other schools' staff allocations decrease.

The idea is that it would be canceled out by BCC students leaving for programs at the other 4 schools (whether that would play out in reality is an open question).

Again, the notion that programs won't increase or decrease enrollment at any school runs contrary to their continued and insistent assertion that the program model and boundary study are inextricably connected with one another.

Yeah, I agree there's no way that at every school the student "imports and exports" will net out to zero. And I think they know that, which is one reason for the argument that it's linked to the boundary changes. But I don't know if BCC, for example, would really net a significant # of students under this system to significantly increase their allocation to hire new teachers.

Not a lot of BCC students currently travel to other schools (e.g. Blair or RMIB). It seems apparent that they will gain students on net.

I could see more BCC kids wanting Blair if they’re no longer needing MAP scores over 300 to get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoa. Jeannie Franklin admitted that schools with existing programs won't get any new staff or resources.

Instead, the bulk of new resources will go to schools getting magnets for the first time, which means Wooton, Churchill, WJ, and BCC.

BCC is not getting a magnet for the first time. Or rather, the IB program that already exists is just going to become the "magnet".

It will need more teachers

I thought none of the programs are getting new teachers, just perhaps some extra training.

If they don't change BCC boundaries but put in a new criteria based program that adds 200 students from other schools, their staff allocation will increase and other schools' staff allocations decrease.

The idea is that it would be canceled out by BCC students leaving for programs at the other 4 schools (whether that would play out in reality is an open question).

Again, the notion that programs won't increase or decrease enrollment at any school runs contrary to their continued and insistent assertion that the program model and boundary study are inextricably connected with one another.

Yeah, I agree there's no way that at every school the student "imports and exports" will net out to zero. And I think they know that, which is one reason for the argument that it's linked to the boundary changes. But I don't know if BCC, for example, would really net a significant # of students under this system to significantly increase their allocation to hire new teachers.

Not a lot of BCC students currently travel to other schools (e.g. Blair or RMIB). It seems apparent that they will gain students on net.

I could see more BCC kids wanting Blair if they’re no longer needing MAP scores over 300 to get in.

Maybe 12 kids per grade will go to Blair for the criteria based program. They won't go to Blair for engineering because they already have their own engineering program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sunil Dasgupta interviewed Jeannie Franklin and Angela McLane, who are leading the program analysis work, on his podcast: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KosyOQX0ov8&fbclid=IwVERDUANxr4RleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHoTawV3wo_MjpzTxA-43TYLRXuPlNxiDz4PKxjzaKZBYe2LACMz_AJxcV5FO_aem_xww9KrITYad4JROVWrBdCQ

I haven't listened to the whole thing yet but it sounds like he asked at least some pointed questions...

The incredible part is they admit some programs in some regions might collapse after a few years. Then what? Kids in these regions will have no such program and cannot apply to other regions. If this is not seggregation and inequity, I don’t know what is. At least now, kids regardless of zip codes can apply to countywide programs.