2026-2027 calendar updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do people honestly want to start a week earlier this year? That is just ridiculous! If they want to implement this policy, it needs to wait until 2027-2028. Teachers AND students have vacation plans, summer school, work obligations, internships, etc. that go until August 22. We are already going back 2 weeks before Labor Day....

Yes, I want my kids to start earlier so they can actually have 180 days of school this year. If we start earlier we can get some more actual school days in before the snow day craziness starts and now have this mess of trying to add June days until June 22, realizing that the teachers don't want to do that and then giving up and cutting 3 days out of the school year.

The teachers are not going to want to come back for an extra week after the last day of school next year either. I don't understand what you think is going to be different just because the calendar has been shifted 3 days earlier. People will still make plans for the week after school ends.

The MCPS calendar should be defined by meeting state requirements for instructional time, not by "what teachers want." By starting 3 days early and getting more days completed earlier in the year, they'll be less likely to need a waiver next year.

No, that is not how math works.

Clearly you don’t understand how math works if you think that doing the same calendar as last year where MCPS had to get a waiver and excuse themselves from meeting state requirements and expecting to get to 180 days of schooling without making any changes is probable.

They ARE essentially proposing doing the same calendar as this year. They are scheduling 181 instructional days (in the 2024-25 there were 182 instructional days in the calendar) and the only actual makeup days that they will be willing to use will occur the week after the last week of school. So not only will there be low staff and student attendance at the beginning of the year, there will also be low staff and student attendance at the end of the year, assuming MSDE doesn't grant a waiver again.

It is not the same calendar as last year as they are starting earlier and will have completed more instructional days by mid-June, such that if they have to use "make up days" at the end of June again, it will be earlier than the June days proposed for this year (i.e. June 22) that were ultimately discarded in favor of getting a waiver to have 177 days of instruction and not meeting Maryland state requirements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do people honestly want to start a week earlier this year? That is just ridiculous! If they want to implement this policy, it needs to wait until 2027-2028. Teachers AND students have vacation plans, summer school, work obligations, internships, etc. that go until August 22. We are already going back 2 weeks before Labor Day....

Yes, I want my kids to start earlier so they can actually have 180 days of school this year. If we start earlier we can get some more actual school days in before the snow day craziness starts and now have this mess of trying to add June days until June 22, realizing that the teachers don't want to do that and then giving up and cutting 3 days out of the school year.

The teachers are not going to want to come back for an extra week after the last day of school next year either. I don't understand what you think is going to be different just because the calendar has been shifted 3 days earlier. People will still make plans for the week after school ends.

The MCPS calendar should be defined by meeting state requirements for instructional time, not by "what teachers want." By starting 3 days early and getting more days completed earlier in the year, they'll be less likely to need a waiver next year.

No, that is not how math works.

Clearly you don’t understand how math works if you think that doing the same calendar as last year where MCPS had to get a waiver and excuse themselves from meeting state requirements and expecting to get to 180 days of schooling without making any changes is probable.

They ARE essentially proposing doing the same calendar as this year. They are scheduling 181 instructional days (in the 2024-25 there were 182 instructional days in the calendar) and the only actual makeup days that they will be willing to use will occur the week after the last week of school. So not only will there be low staff and student attendance at the beginning of the year, there will also be low staff and student attendance at the end of the year, assuming MSDE doesn't grant a waiver again.

It is not the same calendar as last year as they are starting earlier and will have completed more instructional days by mid-June, such that if they have to use "make up days" at the end of June again, it will be earlier than the June days proposed for this year (i.e. June 22) that were ultimately discarded in favor of getting a waiver to have 177 days of instruction and not meeting Maryland state requirements.

There were 6 snow days this year. If there are 6 snow days next year, they will need to make up 5 of them to meet the requirement. However the week after the last day of school includes Juneteenth, so they will only be able to make up 4 of them. Also, many staff and students won't show up since they will have committed to camps, jobs and travel reservations. So I'm not sure why you think those 4 days will be terribly useful and they also won't meet your goal of MCPS having 180 days of school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do people honestly want to start a week earlier this year? That is just ridiculous! If they want to implement this policy, it needs to wait until 2027-2028. Teachers AND students have vacation plans, summer school, work obligations, internships, etc. that go until August 22. We are already going back 2 weeks before Labor Day....

Yes, I want my kids to start earlier so they can actually have 180 days of school this year. If we start earlier we can get some more actual school days in before the snow day craziness starts and now have this mess of trying to add June days until June 22, realizing that the teachers don't want to do that and then giving up and cutting 3 days out of the school year.

The teachers are not going to want to come back for an extra week after the last day of school next year either. I don't understand what you think is going to be different just because the calendar has been shifted 3 days earlier. People will still make plans for the week after school ends.

The MCPS calendar should be defined by meeting state requirements for instructional time, not by "what teachers want." By starting 3 days early and getting more days completed earlier in the year, they'll be less likely to need a waiver next year.

No, that is not how math works.

Clearly you don’t understand how math works if you think that doing the same calendar as last year where MCPS had to get a waiver and excuse themselves from meeting state requirements and expecting to get to 180 days of schooling without making any changes is probable.

They ARE essentially proposing doing the same calendar as this year. They are scheduling 181 instructional days (in the 2024-25 there were 182 instructional days in the calendar) and the only actual makeup days that they will be willing to use will occur the week after the last week of school. So not only will there be low staff and student attendance at the beginning of the year, there will also be low staff and student attendance at the end of the year, assuming MSDE doesn't grant a waiver again.

It is not the same calendar as last year as they are starting earlier and will have completed more instructional days by mid-June, such that if they have to use "make up days" at the end of June again, it will be earlier than the June days proposed for this year (i.e. June 22) that were ultimately discarded in favor of getting a waiver to have 177 days of instruction and not meeting Maryland state requirements.

There were 6 snow days this year. If there are 6 snow days next year, they will need to make up 5 of them to meet the requirement. However the week after the last day of school includes Juneteenth, so they will only be able to make up 4 of them. Also, many staff and students won't show up since they will have committed to camps, jobs and travel reservations. So I'm not sure why you think those 4 days will be terribly useful and they also won't meet your goal of MCPS having 180 days of school.

There are not 6 snow days next year. There is 1 snow day, and 5 makeup days that MCPS has not in the past been willing to use, and that's how we ended up with only 177 days of school this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do people honestly want to start a week earlier this year? That is just ridiculous! If they want to implement this policy, it needs to wait until 2027-2028. Teachers AND students have vacation plans, summer school, work obligations, internships, etc. that go until August 22. We are already going back 2 weeks before Labor Day....

Yes, I want my kids to start earlier so they can actually have 180 days of school this year. If we start earlier we can get some more actual school days in before the snow day craziness starts and now have this mess of trying to add June days until June 22, realizing that the teachers don't want to do that and then giving up and cutting 3 days out of the school year.

The teachers are not going to want to come back for an extra week after the last day of school next year either. I don't understand what you think is going to be different just because the calendar has been shifted 3 days earlier. People will still make plans for the week after school ends.

The MCPS calendar should be defined by meeting state requirements for instructional time, not by "what teachers want." By starting 3 days early and getting more days completed earlier in the year, they'll be less likely to need a waiver next year.

No, that is not how math works.

Clearly you don’t understand how math works if you think that doing the same calendar as last year where MCPS had to get a waiver and excuse themselves from meeting state requirements and expecting to get to 180 days of schooling without making any changes is probable.

They ARE essentially proposing doing the same calendar as this year. They are scheduling 181 instructional days (in the 2024-25 there were 182 instructional days in the calendar) and the only actual makeup days that they will be willing to use will occur the week after the last week of school. So not only will there be low staff and student attendance at the beginning of the year, there will also be low staff and student attendance at the end of the year, assuming MSDE doesn't grant a waiver again.

It is not the same calendar as last year as they are starting earlier and will have completed more instructional days by mid-June, such that if they have to use "make up days" at the end of June again, it will be earlier than the June days proposed for this year (i.e. June 22) that were ultimately discarded in favor of getting a waiver to have 177 days of instruction and not meeting Maryland state requirements.

There were 6 snow days this year. If there are 6 snow days next year, they will need to make up 5 of them to meet the requirement. However the week after the last day of school includes Juneteenth, so they will only be able to make up 4 of them. Also, many staff and students won't show up since they will have committed to camps, jobs and travel reservations. So I'm not sure why you think those 4 days will be terribly useful and they also won't meet your goal of MCPS having 180 days of school.

There are not 6 snow days next year. There is 1 snow day, and 5 makeup days that MCPS has not in the past been willing to use, and that's how we ended up with only 177 days of school this year.

There were 6 snow days this year meaning 6 days during which MCPS closed due to inclement weather. They didn't want to use the 5 makeup days this year. What makes you think they will want to use them next year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do people honestly want to start a week earlier this year? That is just ridiculous! If they want to implement this policy, it needs to wait until 2027-2028. Teachers AND students have vacation plans, summer school, work obligations, internships, etc. that go until August 22. We are already going back 2 weeks before Labor Day....

Yes, I want my kids to start earlier so they can actually have 180 days of school this year. If we start earlier we can get some more actual school days in before the snow day craziness starts and now have this mess of trying to add June days until June 22, realizing that the teachers don't want to do that and then giving up and cutting 3 days out of the school year.

The teachers are not going to want to come back for an extra week after the last day of school next year either. I don't understand what you think is going to be different just because the calendar has been shifted 3 days earlier. People will still make plans for the week after school ends.

The MCPS calendar should be defined by meeting state requirements for instructional time, not by "what teachers want." By starting 3 days early and getting more days completed earlier in the year, they'll be less likely to need a waiver next year.

No, that is not how math works.

Clearly you don’t understand how math works if you think that doing the same calendar as last year where MCPS had to get a waiver and excuse themselves from meeting state requirements and expecting to get to 180 days of schooling without making any changes is probable.

They ARE essentially proposing doing the same calendar as this year. They are scheduling 181 instructional days (in the 2024-25 there were 182 instructional days in the calendar) and the only actual makeup days that they will be willing to use will occur the week after the last week of school. So not only will there be low staff and student attendance at the beginning of the year, there will also be low staff and student attendance at the end of the year, assuming MSDE doesn't grant a waiver again.

It is not the same calendar as last year as they are starting earlier and will have completed more instructional days by mid-June, such that if they have to use "make up days" at the end of June again, it will be earlier than the June days proposed for this year (i.e. June 22) that were ultimately discarded in favor of getting a waiver to have 177 days of instruction and not meeting Maryland state requirements.

The thing you're not factoring into consideration is that Aug 20-21 will not be actual instruction days, so the school year will be starting off with 179 days before ANY snow day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do people honestly want to start a week earlier this year? That is just ridiculous! If they want to implement this policy, it needs to wait until 2027-2028. Teachers AND students have vacation plans, summer school, work obligations, internships, etc. that go until August 22. We are already going back 2 weeks before Labor Day....

Yes, I want my kids to start earlier so they can actually have 180 days of school this year. If we start earlier we can get some more actual school days in before the snow day craziness starts and now have this mess of trying to add June days until June 22, realizing that the teachers don't want to do that and then giving up and cutting 3 days out of the school year.

The teachers are not going to want to come back for an extra week after the last day of school next year either. I don't understand what you think is going to be different just because the calendar has been shifted 3 days earlier. People will still make plans for the week after school ends.

The MCPS calendar should be defined by meeting state requirements for instructional time, not by "what teachers want." By starting 3 days early and getting more days completed earlier in the year, they'll be less likely to need a waiver next year.

No, that is not how math works.

Clearly you don’t understand how math works if you think that doing the same calendar as last year where MCPS had to get a waiver and excuse themselves from meeting state requirements and expecting to get to 180 days of schooling without making any changes is probable.

They ARE essentially proposing doing the same calendar as this year. They are scheduling 181 instructional days (in the 2024-25 there were 182 instructional days in the calendar) and the only actual makeup days that they will be willing to use will occur the week after the last week of school. So not only will there be low staff and student attendance at the beginning of the year, there will also be low staff and student attendance at the end of the year, assuming MSDE doesn't grant a waiver again.

It is not the same calendar as last year as they are starting earlier and will have completed more instructional days by mid-June, such that if they have to use "make up days" at the end of June again, it will be earlier than the June days proposed for this year (i.e. June 22) that were ultimately discarded in favor of getting a waiver to have 177 days of instruction and not meeting Maryland state requirements.

The thing you're not factoring into consideration is that Aug 20-21 will not be actual instruction days, so the school year will be starting off with 179 days before ANY snow day.

+1
I don't know why PP thinks:
- Making the school year 3 days earlier will prevent MCPS from seeking a waiver or getting a waiver granted or
- having certain disruption at the beginning of the year and probable disruption at the end of the year is good for kids

[Anonymous]

Since TT basically only discussed 1 option (moving the start date earlier) at the last BOE meeting, what are the chances he chooses another option? What if the survey results show majority of people don't want to start earlier in August? Will he listen or does he do what he wants? I'm genuinely curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since TT basically only discussed 1 option (moving the start date earlier) at the last BOE meeting, what are the chances he chooses another option? What if the survey results show majority of people don't want to start earlier in August? Will he listen or does he do what he wants? I'm genuinely curious.

My guess is given MCEA is also surveying its members that there is a negotiation going on behind the scenes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since TT basically only discussed 1 option (moving the start date earlier) at the last BOE meeting, what are the chances he chooses another option? What if the survey results show majority of people don't want to start earlier in August? Will he listen or does he do what he wants? I'm genuinely curious.

My guess is given MCEA is also surveying its members that there is a negotiation going on behind the scenes

I thought MCEA wasn't allowed to negotiate the calendar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since TT basically only discussed 1 option (moving the start date earlier) at the last BOE meeting, what are the chances he chooses another option? What if the survey results show majority of people don't want to start earlier in August? Will he listen or does he do what he wants? I'm genuinely curious.

My guess is given MCEA is also surveying its members that there is a negotiation going on behind the scenes

I thought MCEA wasn't allowed to negotiate the calendar.

They could let them use grading and reporting days as half days, which would improve the calendar, woth teachers being able to start five days later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since TT basically only discussed 1 option (moving the start date earlier) at the last BOE meeting, what are the chances he chooses another option? What if the survey results show majority of people don't want to start earlier in August? Will he listen or does he do what he wants? I'm genuinely curious.

My guess is given MCEA is also surveying its members that there is a negotiation going on behind the scenes

I thought MCEA wasn't allowed to negotiate the calendar.

They aren't going to put this in the collective bargaining agreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schedule classes over the religious holidays. We can start with Christmas.

I'm down with that if opening on Christmas has no operational impact. Let's evaluate each religious day off with that as the standard.

Let's not. Public schools are not supposed to favor religions, or religion over no religion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since TT basically only discussed 1 option (moving the start date earlier) at the last BOE meeting, what are the chances he chooses another option? What if the survey results show majority of people don't want to start earlier in August? Will he listen or does he do what he wants? I'm genuinely curious.

Theoretically, it is up to the board to decide, not Taylor. If the survey reveals the majority doesn't want the early start, they have the ability to go with another option. Now, will they exercise that option in reality? Not likely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since TT basically only discussed 1 option (moving the start date earlier) at the last BOE meeting, what are the chances he chooses another option? What if the survey results show majority of people don't want to start earlier in August? Will he listen or does he do what he wants? I'm genuinely curious.

Theoretically, it is up to the board to decide, not Taylor. If the survey reveals the majority doesn't want the early start, they have the ability to go with another option. Now, will they exercise that option in reality? Not likely.

They are banking on a huge outcry that forces the union to give up grading days. Union should call TT's bluff. Changing the start of preservice to a time when many teachers will be unable to make it is unworkable and will result in a chaotic start to the school year. MCEA should let TT own that mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since TT basically only discussed 1 option (moving the start date earlier) at the last BOE meeting, what are the chances he chooses another option? What if the survey results show majority of people don't want to start earlier in August? Will he listen or does he do what he wants? I'm genuinely curious.

Theoretically, it is up to the board to decide, not Taylor. If the survey reveals the majority doesn't want the early start, they have the ability to go with another option. Now, will they exercise that option in reality? Not likely.

They are banking on a huge outcry that forces the union to give up grading days. Union should call TT's bluff. Changing the start of preservice to a time when many teachers will be unable to make it is unworkable and will result in a chaotic start to the school year. MCEA should let TT own that mess.

Survey may say people like the earlier start date. Every high school parent I know thinks the earlier start is a good thing. Kids in AP classes were really at a disadvantage this year with MCPS closed for so many days during a critical period.