Did anyone attend the Choice survey community meeting yesterday?

[Anonymous]

I'm planning to go to the one that is closer to home, but I'm curious if anyone attended yesterday's meeting at Gaithersburg HS. What were the main topics of discussion?

[Anonymous]

I am curious too. I was not able to go, but heard that a large group of Chinese American parents were going to attend to support the GT/Magnet programs.

[Anonymous]

Yes, i attended. It is well organized almost too well so no one talked freely.
There are many people from mcps, except two main speakers crom equity office, each table has one official from mcps to monitor the discussion. Three questions were printed on large peice of paper. After the lady went through the summary n recommendation from the report, a gentleman presented a few slides showed the student population changes since 1972 with brekdown in each race. He then showed the equiality vs equity with three kids watching baseball game.

[Anonymous]

I went. It was a large meeting with many tables and hundreds of parents. There was discussion at each table around 4 or 5 points relating to the study. After discussion 3 or so tables presented their discussions. Notes were taken at the tables and supposedly MCPS will review the notes.

There were spanish, chinese, french tables and many translators. Ironically the spanish tables were all empty except for one (no one came). There were many asian parents in attendance.

There was some heated discussion at my table around recommendation 3a. One of the table presenters also made a passionate point about how it is important to keep academic achievement and testing as a primary factor for admittance into the HGC/MS/HS magnets. He was loudly applauded.

There seem to also be a group of parents opposed to removing the sibling link but the audience didn't seem to care about that much.

[Anonymous]

Not the OP, but thanks for the report. I was not able to attend.

[Anonymous]

Please everyone provide feedback, especially on recommendation 3a

[Anonymous]

They showed a graphic to say that Asians and Whites were disproportionately represented in magnet schools and Hispanics and Blacks are not.
So, they want to use non-cognitive assessment tools to get these under-represented groups into these programs. MCPS wants to spin this as URM not applying because they are not informed about these programs and 2) the current method of evaluating candidate (performance) is not-equitable, because it is based on performance. Their assertion is that SES prevents these people from getting into these programs. It is worrisome because the students should be in the same proportion as the racial proportion of the population in the county. So, there should be different standards for different racial groups of students, to get into these programs.

They did not use this graphic-




They used this graphic.

[Anonymous]

^ I think it's dangerous when you start applying that kind of equity simply by race. There are plenty of black families that are not lower income, living on the west side of the county, who have just as much access to "enrichment" as my asian kid. They live in my neighborhood; go to the same after school activities, and their parents have higher degrees than I do.

[Anonymous]

Why is equity desired in this case? Magnet school is not watching baseball, the correct analogy would be making the baseball team. Nobody is talking about racial equity in sports. Why in academics?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I went. It was a large meeting with many tables and hundreds of parents. There was discussion at each table around 4 or 5 points relating to the study. After discussion 3 or so tables presented their discussions. Notes were taken at the tables and supposedly MCPS will review the notes.

There were spanish, chinese, french tables and many translators. Ironically the spanish tables were all empty except for one (no one came). There were many asian parents in attendance.

There was some heated discussion at my table around recommendation 3a. One of the table presenters also made a passionate point about how it is important to keep academic achievement and testing as a primary factor for admittance into the HGC/MS/HS magnets. He was loudly applauded.

There seem to also be a group of parents opposed to removing the sibling link but the audience didn't seem to care about that much.

There's no irony... There is no Spanish Immersion upcounty so why would most people care or show up? This is part of the equity of access hinted at in the choice study with unequal access across the county. Watch how many show up at Walter Johnson and Kennedy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They showed a graphic to say that Asians and Whites were disproportionately represented in magnet schools and Hispanics and Blacks are not.
So, they want to use non-cognitive assessment tools to get these under-represented groups into these programs. MCPS wants to spin this as URM not applying because they are not informed about these programs and 2) the current method of evaluating candidate (performance) is not-equitable, because it is based on performance. Their assertion is that SES prevents these people from getting into these programs. It is worrisome because the students should be in the same proportion as the racial proportion of the population in the county. So, there should be different standards for different racial groups of students, to get into these programs.

They did not use this graphic-




They used this graphic.

This graphic makes no sense to me, especially in regards to an HGC. So, in order to be 'equitable', we give certain kids extra help.... How, exactly? If they want to advocate for lower teacher ratios for lower SES kids, or FARMS kids or ESOL, I can get behind that. What do the 'boxes' in that picture represent? Lowering the scores for HGC entrance, certainly doesn't benefit anyone.

[Anonymous]

2) the current method of evaluating candidate (performance) is not-equitable, because it is based on performance.

?? But the programs are looking for high performing kids? Or if not then they are just random magnet programs for kids who want to go to a different school? Maybe they will add themes to them like the non-competitive magnets to still attract kids?

[Anonymous]

Hey, my kids are short and weak. Can they get an extra boost when playing school sponsored sports?

I am short. From what I remember, during PE, I could not get over those damned hurdles no matter how hard I tried. I got an F for that section of my PE class. How come they don't adjust for height and physicality in PE or school sponsored sports? I could never get an A in PE. It affected my overall GPA.

[Anonymous]

The school system has a completely different goal than most of the parents on here. Parents on DCUM are usually success stories in the alleged meritocracy of our education system. They believe the schools should also be meritocracies so their kids can become successful under the same system. But the school system sees its job as providing the best education possible to all students -- not just the best students. If your superstar kid wins and many other students lose, you're still happy. But if 20% of MCPS students win and 80% lose, MCPS is not happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The school system has a completely different goal than most of the parents on here. Parents on DCUM are usually success stories in the alleged meritocracy of our education system. They believe the schools should also be meritocracies so their kids can become successful under the same system. But the school system sees its job as providing the best education possible to all students -- not just the best students. If your superstar kid wins and many other students lose, you're still happy. But if 20% of MCPS students win and 80% lose, MCPS is not happy.

Then how about creating some more magnet programs will take in students based on the criteria of equity as defined by MCPS?