Support the Montgomery Virtual Academy (MVA) from Budget Cuts!

[Anonymous]

Virtual teaching is nice because you don’t have to deal with any classroom management. And when you disconnect from zoom, no one can bug you. And obviously no commute. Hard to go back to an actual building where you get practically no time to yourself

[Anonymous]

IMO MVA should have just been tweaked as a school for students with medical problems and unique learning/behavior challenges rather than outright being cut. MCPS definitely could have been a national model for this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:IMO MVA should have just been tweaked as a school for students with medical problems and unique learning/behavior challenges rather than outright being cut. MCPS definitely could have been a national model for this.

It was already too small to be viable. Parents of elementary-aged kids understandably weren't interested in MVA, plus the outcomes were particularly bad there. And if you limited high school MVA to only kids with a legitimate need, you wouldn't be able to offer a broad range of courses.

This is why MVA supporters should have been pushing for a state-wide program to begin with. Instead they fought that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The MVA supporters at the meeting demonstrated the same level of respect, dignity, and integrity as the MVA posters on DCUM. Yet they were somehow surprised MVA was ultimately closed?

Maybe next time you shouldn't demonize working parents, propose closing schools, or suggest cutting special education services.

So that’s why it closed? Because they pissed you off? lol okkkkk

Choosing to not alienate 99.5% of the MCPS community can only help.

Please cite the data that supports that statement.

Come on. Cite the data. Now.

Look at MVA enrollment numbers versus MCPS school numbers.

[Anonymous]

And where should the money come from in the cut budget?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO MVA should have just been tweaked as a school for students with medical problems and unique learning/behavior challenges rather than outright being cut. MCPS definitely could have been a national model for this.

It was already too small to be viable. Parents of elementary-aged kids understandably weren't interested in MVA, plus the outcomes were particularly bad there. And if you limited high school MVA to only kids with a legitimate need, you wouldn't be able to offer a broad range of courses.

This is why MVA supporters should have been pushing for a state-wide program to begin with. Instead they fought that.

Can you show us current data on why it was bad and which current parents feel that way?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO MVA should have just been tweaked as a school for students with medical problems and unique learning/behavior challenges rather than outright being cut. MCPS definitely could have been a national model for this.

It was already too small to be viable. Parents of elementary-aged kids understandably weren't interested in MVA, plus the outcomes were particularly bad there. And if you limited high school MVA to only kids with a legitimate need, you wouldn't be able to offer a broad range of courses.

This is why MVA supporters should have been pushing for a state-wide program to begin with. Instead they fought that.

Can you show us current data on why it was bad and which current parents feel that way?

Ah, the old “don’t trust the objective data, just listen to the parents” argument is making a comeback. Remind me - is the idea that the program made a dramatic shift overnight and that the powers that be at MCPS conspired to keep this miraculous news hidden from the public and the BOE in order to save $5 million next year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are the VAcademy students performing better than in-school students? So VAcademy students take McAP, MISA, MAP, Benchmark etc assessments?

Lower grades performed much worse compared to in-person:
https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2023/Virtual%20Academy%20FINAL.pdf

FARMS students in the MVA program also scored significantly worse than their in person peers on assessments.

Citation? I don't think that's in the report linked to above.

See pages 27 and 29 of the report.

“Students in grades 1 through 5 attending MVA were significantly less likely than their in person peers to meet their projected growth in math in Spring 2022. Within student service groups, MVA students receiving FARMS were significantly less likely than their in person peers to meet their projected growth in math…”

The same is said about reading on Slide 29.

Unfortunately, while the MVA might work for some, it leaves behind the youngest and poorest kids.

Seems unfair that sone low performers are ruining it for everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Is it possible for the MVA students to transfer to homeschooling? Does MCPS support homeschooling?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible for the MVA students to transfer to homeschooling? Does MCPS support homeschooling?

Based on their posts on Dcum and their behavior at the BoE meeting, do you really want MVA parents teaching their kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO MVA should have just been tweaked as a school for students with medical problems and unique learning/behavior challenges rather than outright being cut. MCPS definitely could have been a national model for this.

It was already too small to be viable. Parents of elementary-aged kids understandably weren't interested in MVA, plus the outcomes were particularly bad there. And if you limited high school MVA to only kids with a legitimate need, you wouldn't be able to offer a broad range of courses.

This is why MVA supporters should have been pushing for a state-wide program to begin with. Instead they fought that.

A small scale program for students with legitimate needs seems viable to me. The outcomes are naturally going to be worse than in person since they cater to a higher percentage of lower income and special needs students than the average MCPS. Totally agree on a state wide program. My things is, schools claim they want to innovate education, but when they do so, they want to cut it? Seems baffling to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO MVA should have just been tweaked as a school for students with medical problems and unique learning/behavior challenges rather than outright being cut. MCPS definitely could have been a national model for this.

It was already too small to be viable. Parents of elementary-aged kids understandably weren't interested in MVA, plus the outcomes were particularly bad there. And if you limited high school MVA to only kids with a legitimate need, you wouldn't be able to offer a broad range of courses.

This is why MVA supporters should have been pushing for a state-wide program to begin with. Instead they fought that.

A small scale program for students with legitimate needs seems viable to me. The outcomes are naturally going to be worse than in person since they cater to a higher percentage of lower income and special needs students than the average MCPS. Totally agree on a state wide program. My things is, schools claim they want to innovate education, but when they do so, they want to cut it? Seems baffling to me.

It could be viable in a different budget environment, but it's an expensive add-on given that it duplicates services provided in schools.

Schools should innovate, but MVA doesn't fit into MCPS's scope. It makes no sense to operate virtual school at the county/district level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And where should the money come from in the cut budget?

Put out a few contracts for competitive bids. Do some comparison shopping. Save $5M.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And where should the money come from in the cut budget?

Put out a few contracts for competitive bids. Do some comparison shopping. Save $5M.

Which ones? Be specific.

[Anonymous]

I was reading through the report and noticed that the FARMS rate for MVA students is 43.1%. Why is the FARMS rate so high for MVA students? My own experience in working with low income families, is that these are the kids that most need to be in in-person school. Poverty is already isolating for children, it is counterproductive to isolate them more.