The system has changed in the past 10 years. Smart kids get left behind all the time. |
It still not a countywide magnet. It's a regional magnet whether it it consists of 16, 8 or 6 schools. I think I get it now...many are screaming "the sky is falling", "the program will be watered down" because Blair won't be in their regions. They're going to lose access to Blair. |
Like so many other things, they avoid talking about that bit of detail. |
You really don't. |
I think the PP is right. Many are freaking out because Blair is not in their region. |
You can look at Fairfax. At the elementary level, everyone identified is served, but look at the AAPP forum - lots of complaints about it being “watered down.” I don’t know anywhere that does it just right - especially since every parent’s definition of just right is “serving my kid but not any kids who might be below them.” |
This is a great observation, and there's another phenomenon of assuming some sort of deceit or unfairness if a child they perceive as being below their own is being served. So, you often see someone talk about racial or geographic quotas for Blair/RMIB even though those things do not exist, and have never existed. The process is race blind. But there's this perception that there's some finger on a scale out there making sure a specific PP's poster didn't get in. |
Yes, that's how you killed the school system. Find the lowest common denominator. That's how MCPS's raising performance gap between two groups. Lower the upper bar rather than raising the low bar. |
The MCPS model says everyone who meets the central review criteria (different from gifted) is served-- some in a regional program and some at their local schools. That's what FFX does too. The difference is that in FFX there are tiers or levels and in MCPS all who meet the criteria are put in a pool and those who get the regional program are selected by lottery and local schools are hit or miss in providing something "different" for identified kids. |
Language immersion is not a magnet. It is interest-based. CES is a criteria-based magnet, in that there are standards for being placed in the lottery. |
CES and MS criteria-based magnets have already been watered down since the inception of the lottery. Those of us who have kids there now and had kids there previously can attest to the change in content and stanrdards. I would absolutely be worried that they will be further watered down as MCPS makes more changes if I had a child who will be eligible once the changes are in place. |
I'd say that pretty universally gen-ed programs in local middle schools are bad at meeting the needs of gifted kids. That's why everyone in clamoring to get into Eastern and Takoma. We would rather have our kids served at home schools, but even the classes intended for gifted learners like HIGH and AIM are not particularly challenging. |
Magnet just means a school that has programs to attract students from a wider area. The programs don't have to be criteria-based. |
My kid will be a 6th grader in Fall 2027. What is the change that PP are talking about here about MS magnet or program change? Can someone summarize for me please? He will be in CES as a 4th grader in Fall 2025. |
They are looking at changes to magnet programming at the HS & MS level. Nothing is yet certain, but... They have put forward a notional 6-region breakout of magnet programming at the HS level. They have said they will be looking at MS magnets, as well, but have not put forward any similar notional draft. They have indicated that any rearrangement of magnet programming will inform decisions about the current MS/HS boundary studies. The timeline for the latter appears to be why the timeline for the former seems rushed. They aim to expand seats and improve access (making them closer, on average), but they have been reticent in relation to many concerns expressed here, at meetings and elsewhere, including: What will happen to current rising 8th and rising 5th graders that are assigned to magnets (interest- or criteria-based) or assigned to other schools as part of a consortium? These will be rising 10th and rising 7th graders in 2027, and prior indication from MCPS was that only rising 8th, 11th and 12th graders would be able to stay at their current school if their home address was reassingned in the boundary study. (As a rising 6th grader in 2027, your DC presumably would be eligible, for all of their MS experience, for assignment to whichever MS magnet any adopted paradigm offered.) Will MCPS be able to preserve the excellence of programs like RMIB & Blair SMCS in a regionalized model? Some feel there are not enough students of high ability to support one program in each region or that necessary teaching talent would be too scarce. Which programs are likely to go away? Will those chosen to be closed be continued until graduation for any then-currently enrolled? Will any current programs be moved to different schools? Will programs be placed within regions to encourage economic/demographic diversity, as many had been? Will programs across regions offer reasonably similar experiences, or will some regions offer pale shadows of desired programs in other regions? This might be due to difficulty staffing newer magnets or to community pull dictating regular availability of higher-level magnet coursework in one region but not another. For that matter, will the advanced classes that are supposed to be available system-wide at home schools really be available system-wide at meaningful levels? The same community-pull paradigm could see there remain a have and have-not dichotomy among schools when it comes to offerings like Multivariable Calculus (typically taken immediately after first-year college Calc, often accessed as an AP by junior year in MCPS). Can MCPS create reasonably balanced regions that are logistically feasible? Will the larger number of magnets requiring transportation be offset by relative proximity from cost and communte time perspectives? What is the likely fiscal impact of the overall plan, and, if very large, would that tend to undermine the stated aims such that alternative solutions should be considered? Have outreach/communication and community stakeholder involvement been adequate? (We need the rolling-on-the-floor-crying emoji for this one.) I'm sure there are many more. |