MCPS to end areawide Blair Magnet and countywide Richard Montgomery's IB program

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

MVC

there are not enough students interested in MVC in each HS to offer it. If we had unlimited funding, sure. But, we don't. Plus, good luck finding good teachers to teach mvc at every HS.

I know nothing about MVC so am curious what folks think-- is it better to take MVC virtually from a good teacher (both good at teaching MVC and good at online teaching), or to take it locally with a poor or mediocre teacher?

(I know some individual kids really struggle with virtual learning, but I'm talking about the majority of kids here.)

I'm a university faculty, and I had supervised an undergrad from a mediocre university before through the REU program. He was in English major, but happened to take an astronomy class for fun, and the professor who taught that class found him smart, so recommended to me to do some data analysis work. He started to learn coding all by himself from scratch, and at the end of that summer, he completed his work and we finished a scientific paper together later that year. He applied to a graduate program for astronomy major in a prestigious university, and got an offer. Now he is a PhD candidate there. I once asked him why he chose English as his major. And he told me he had a really bad experience in Calc BC class back in HS, that made him hating math so much, until he took the astronomy class, and finally found his true love and true talent. This is how a good or a bad HS teacher could impact...

Okay, so is that a vote for prioritizing getting good teachers and having them teach virtually if you can't get enough good MVC teachers for all the high schools, over having an in-person MVC teacher at all high schools even if they're a bad teacher?

As a parent, my opinion doesn't matter. Ppl on this board said we should listen to Taylor or Hazel who have education PhDs and hence who should be the experts, neglecting the fact that they didn't know the magnet curriculum, and didn't care how to expand the curriculum nor how to train or find qualified teachers. Nicky Hazel even spelled "cosmology" wrong under the "STEM" example course offering in her slides (she spelled "cosmetology"). So whatever the hell.

Taylor doesn't have a PhD; he has an EdD (lower bar). Hazel has a master's degree.

Good grief he has a doctorate in education (a terminal degree) from the University of Virginia. Hazel’s masters is from the University of Pennsylvania. Are we really going to be snobs about their education or can we focus on substance.

These ED degrees are about admin, not curriculum. They don't know curriculum. And they are lost in the woods on this new regional system with regional programming. These programs are being made up on the fly. Too many changes, too quickly. And they are taking down flagship programs, for what? They could do the regional programs and still form cross-regional student cohorts for magnets.

And mcps hires “instructional specialists” with degrees from Kaplan and Capella University…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

MVC

there are not enough students interested in MVC in each HS to offer it. If we had unlimited funding, sure. But, we don't. Plus, good luck finding good teachers to teach mvc at every HS.

I know nothing about MVC so am curious what folks think-- is it better to take MVC virtually from a good teacher (both good at teaching MVC and good at online teaching), or to take it locally with a poor or mediocre teacher?

(I know some individual kids really struggle with virtual learning, but I'm talking about the majority of kids here.)

I'm a university faculty, and I had supervised an undergrad from a mediocre university before through the REU program. He was in English major, but happened to take an astronomy class for fun, and the professor who taught that class found him smart, so recommended to me to do some data analysis work. He started to learn coding all by himself from scratch, and at the end of that summer, he completed his work and we finished a scientific paper together later that year. He applied to a graduate program for astronomy major in a prestigious university, and got an offer. Now he is a PhD candidate there. I once asked him why he chose English as his major. And he told me he had a really bad experience in Calc BC class back in HS, that made him hating math so much, until he took the astronomy class, and finally found his true love and true talent. This is how a good or a bad HS teacher could impact...

Okay, so is that a vote for prioritizing getting good teachers and having them teach virtually if you can't get enough good MVC teachers for all the high schools, over having an in-person MVC teacher at all high schools even if they're a bad teacher?

As a parent, my opinion doesn't matter. Ppl on this board said we should listen to Taylor or Hazel who have education PhDs and hence who should be the experts, neglecting the fact that they didn't know the magnet curriculum, and didn't care how to expand the curriculum nor how to train or find qualified teachers. Nicky Hazel even spelled "cosmology" wrong under the "STEM" example course offering in her slides (she spelled "cosmetology"). So whatever the hell.

Taylor doesn't have a PhD; he has an EdD (lower bar). Hazel has a master's degree.

Good grief he has a doctorate in education (a terminal degree) from the University of Virginia. Hazel’s masters is from the University of Pennsylvania. Are we really going to be snobs about their education or can we focus on substance.

These ED degrees are about admin, not curriculum. They don't know curriculum. And they are lost in the woods on this new regional system with regional programming. These programs are being made up on the fly. Too many changes, too quickly. And they are taking down flagship programs, for what? They could do the regional programs and still form cross-regional student cohorts for magnets.

There are EdD in curriculum and policy…

An education degree in curriculum does not provide a deep dive into specific content areas. Taylor was a social studies teacher and Hazel was an elementary school teacher for awhile. Teaching a content area is what provides you depth of understanding - neither Taylor nor Hazel could develop and sequence coursework in a comprehensive STEM program, and they don't appreciate what they are giving up with canceling our countywide magnet programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

MVC

there are not enough students interested in MVC in each HS to offer it. If we had unlimited funding, sure. But, we don't. Plus, good luck finding good teachers to teach mvc at every HS.

I know nothing about MVC so am curious what folks think-- is it better to take MVC virtually from a good teacher (both good at teaching MVC and good at online teaching), or to take it locally with a poor or mediocre teacher?

(I know some individual kids really struggle with virtual learning, but I'm talking about the majority of kids here.)

I'm a university faculty, and I had supervised an undergrad from a mediocre university before through the REU program. He was in English major, but happened to take an astronomy class for fun, and the professor who taught that class found him smart, so recommended to me to do some data analysis work. He started to learn coding all by himself from scratch, and at the end of that summer, he completed his work and we finished a scientific paper together later that year. He applied to a graduate program for astronomy major in a prestigious university, and got an offer. Now he is a PhD candidate there. I once asked him why he chose English as his major. And he told me he had a really bad experience in Calc BC class back in HS, that made him hating math so much, until he took the astronomy class, and finally found his true love and true talent. This is how a good or a bad HS teacher could impact...

Okay, so is that a vote for prioritizing getting good teachers and having them teach virtually if you can't get enough good MVC teachers for all the high schools, over having an in-person MVC teacher at all high schools even if they're a bad teacher?

As a parent, my opinion doesn't matter. Ppl on this board said we should listen to Taylor or Hazel who have education PhDs and hence who should be the experts, neglecting the fact that they didn't know the magnet curriculum, and didn't care how to expand the curriculum nor how to train or find qualified teachers. Nicky Hazel even spelled "cosmology" wrong under the "STEM" example course offering in her slides (she spelled "cosmetology"). So whatever the hell.

Taylor doesn't have a PhD; he has an EdD (lower bar). Hazel has a master's degree.

Good grief he has a doctorate in education (a terminal degree) from the University of Virginia. Hazel’s masters is from the University of Pennsylvania. Are we really going to be snobs about their education or can we focus on substance.

These ED degrees are about admin, not curriculum. They don't know curriculum. And they are lost in the woods on this new regional system with regional programming. These programs are being made up on the fly. Too many changes, too quickly. And they are taking down flagship programs, for what? They could do the regional programs and still form cross-regional student cohorts for magnets.

And mcps hires “instructional specialists” with degrees from Kaplan and Capella University…

MCPS probably subsidizes or pays for those degrees if the instruction specialists stay in the system for a specified period of time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

MVC

there are not enough students interested in MVC in each HS to offer it. If we had unlimited funding, sure. But, we don't. Plus, good luck finding good teachers to teach mvc at every HS.

I know nothing about MVC so am curious what folks think-- is it better to take MVC virtually from a good teacher (both good at teaching MVC and good at online teaching), or to take it locally with a poor or mediocre teacher?

(I know some individual kids really struggle with virtual learning, but I'm talking about the majority of kids here.)

I'm a university faculty, and I had supervised an undergrad from a mediocre university before through the REU program. He was in English major, but happened to take an astronomy class for fun, and the professor who taught that class found him smart, so recommended to me to do some data analysis work. He started to learn coding all by himself from scratch, and at the end of that summer, he completed his work and we finished a scientific paper together later that year. He applied to a graduate program for astronomy major in a prestigious university, and got an offer. Now he is a PhD candidate there. I once asked him why he chose English as his major. And he told me he had a really bad experience in Calc BC class back in HS, that made him hating math so much, until he took the astronomy class, and finally found his true love and true talent. This is how a good or a bad HS teacher could impact...

Okay, so is that a vote for prioritizing getting good teachers and having them teach virtually if you can't get enough good MVC teachers for all the high schools, over having an in-person MVC teacher at all high schools even if they're a bad teacher?

As a parent, my opinion doesn't matter. Ppl on this board said we should listen to Taylor or Hazel who have education PhDs and hence who should be the experts, neglecting the fact that they didn't know the magnet curriculum, and didn't care how to expand the curriculum nor how to train or find qualified teachers. Nicky Hazel even spelled "cosmology" wrong under the "STEM" example course offering in her slides (she spelled "cosmetology"). So whatever the hell.

Taylor doesn't have a PhD; he has an EdD (lower bar). Hazel has a master's degree.

Good grief he has a doctorate in education (a terminal degree) from the University of Virginia. Hazel’s masters is from the University of Pennsylvania. Are we really going to be snobs about their education or can we focus on substance.

These ED degrees are about admin, not curriculum. They don't know curriculum. And they are lost in the woods on this new regional system with regional programming. These programs are being made up on the fly. Too many changes, too quickly. And they are taking down flagship programs, for what? They could do the regional programs and still form cross-regional student cohorts for magnets.

There are EdD in curriculum and policy…

An education degree in curriculum does not provide a deep dive into specific content areas. Taylor was a social studies teacher and Hazel was an elementary school teacher for awhile. Teaching a content area is what provides you depth of understanding - neither Taylor nor Hazel could develop and sequence coursework in a comprehensive STEM program, and they don't appreciate what they are giving up with canceling our countywide magnet programs.

This is exactly what I want to say, but thanks a lot for saying it in a better way with more context. I don't know their teaching experience, but just through my observation since Tylor joined the show (yes, I've watched every BOE meeting since last summer) was that he is a good politician, but he couldn't care less about real education, real students and real teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

Does MCPS have enough good math teachers to teach AP BC calc in every HS? There's a shortage of STEM teachers. I don't think MCPS can find enough good teachers for math.

My kid wanted to take AB Calc but the teacher was so bad that they downgraded to Applied Calc. A bad math teacher can make the class awful, and the kid to hate math.

Then fix that part. But saying that there shouldn't be an advanced math class in every HS is terrible. And yes some schools may only offer one AP calc class and have 10 kids. That's ok. But someone will complain that too many resources are used on the 10 kids in that school while a W school has to have 3 sections of 30 kids in calculus and won't get funding for a 4th.

40 kids to a class is normal. Be thankful your school has it. It’s not ok if they aren’t offering Mv and beyond while your school has multiple advanced classes. Why should my tax dollars fund your kids advance classes when my kids don’t get them?

Because your kid isn't smart enough to pass MV. Now, I said it!

dp

Except my kid is and already did bc.

So nobody should get it if your kid cannot? Is that really where we are at?

No, we are at all kids should have access to the same classes. So mine should get the same as yours. It’s unfair to kids who take bc sophomore year that they don’t have enough math classes to graduate.

So that means the magnets should be destroyed?

You have zero evidence the magnets are being destroyed. The world will not end if the current status quo changes from that which only kids from a few high school areas that are closest to the program sites attend. Ideally they'd change the narrow selection criteria as well so it's not focused only on MAP-R or MAP-M scores, which are not designed to measure cognitive ability.

Actually, the countywide magnets and SMCS will be destroyed. Said so during Q&A of the most recent BOE mtg. It is their plan NOT to replicate these programs.

They didn't say destroyed. They said they would all be regional, not countywide, and that each reguon would have some program that falls within the same magnet category (e.g., STEM).

The interpretation by some, here, is that there are not enough capable students, and perhaps not enough capable teachers, to support the same kinds of high-level & specialized classes that have been available at the county-wide/semi-county-wide magnets. That interpretation and the assumptions on which it is based are the subjects of debate.

The thing that MCPS hasn't clarified is whether each regional magnet will operate at the same level, not only as each other, but as the original county-wide/semi-county-wide magnets, offering similar, if not the same, depth, breadth and rigor to meet the needs of the highly able students attending. This reticence, combined with MCPS's history over the past 3 or so decades of withholding pertinet information to limit opposition to internally determined plans, lends credence to some of the concerns expressed, even if some of the underlying assumptions regarding the prevalence and dispersion of student and teacher capability might be incorrect. Deep, persistent questions on this issue, and the parallel issue of truly equitable access to local high-level courses outside of the magnets, should be, and, sadly, should already have been but were not, among the very first asked by the BOE.

https://mocoshow.com/2025/08/03/mcps-proposes-regional-high-school-magnet-plan/#more-113641

If a HS journalist understands that the countywide programs are about to be dismantled, I hope people can get past quibbling about semantics to understand that the countywide programs as they exist today will no longer be the same. For starters, I'd like to see if the new regional SMCS will be 7 or 8 periods or if they get watered down to simply STEM programs. That news comes out in Aug, possibly Sept. I'm also waiting to see what they propose for Poolesville Global Ecology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

MVC

there are not enough students interested in MVC in each HS to offer it. If we had unlimited funding, sure. But, we don't. Plus, good luck finding good teachers to teach mvc at every HS.

I know nothing about MVC so am curious what folks think-- is it better to take MVC virtually from a good teacher (both good at teaching MVC and good at online teaching), or to take it locally with a poor or mediocre teacher?

(I know some individual kids really struggle with virtual learning, but I'm talking about the majority of kids here.)

I'm a university faculty, and I had supervised an undergrad from a mediocre university before through the REU program. He was in English major, but happened to take an astronomy class for fun, and the professor who taught that class found him smart, so recommended to me to do some data analysis work. He started to learn coding all by himself from scratch, and at the end of that summer, he completed his work and we finished a scientific paper together later that year. He applied to a graduate program for astronomy major in a prestigious university, and got an offer. Now he is a PhD candidate there. I once asked him why he chose English as his major. And he told me he had a really bad experience in Calc BC class back in HS, that made him hating math so much, until he took the astronomy class, and finally found his true love and true talent. This is how a good or a bad HS teacher could impact...

Okay, so is that a vote for prioritizing getting good teachers and having them teach virtually if you can't get enough good MVC teachers for all the high schools, over having an in-person MVC teacher at all high schools even if they're a bad teacher?

As a parent, my opinion doesn't matter. Ppl on this board said we should listen to Taylor or Hazel who have education PhDs and hence who should be the experts, neglecting the fact that they didn't know the magnet curriculum, and didn't care how to expand the curriculum nor how to train or find qualified teachers. Nicky Hazel even spelled "cosmology" wrong under the "STEM" example course offering in her slides (she spelled "cosmetology"). So whatever the hell.

Taylor doesn't have a PhD; he has an EdD (lower bar). Hazel has a master's degree.

Good grief he has a doctorate in education (a terminal degree) from the University of Virginia. Hazel’s masters is from the University of Pennsylvania. Are we really going to be snobs about their education or can we focus on substance.

These ED degrees are about admin, not curriculum. They don't know curriculum. And they are lost in the woods on this new regional system with regional programming. These programs are being made up on the fly. Too many changes, too quickly. And they are taking down flagship programs, for what? They could do the regional programs and still form cross-regional student cohorts for magnets.

There are EdD in curriculum and policy…

An education degree in curriculum does not provide a deep dive into specific content areas. Taylor was a social studies teacher and Hazel was an elementary school teacher for awhile. Teaching a content area is what provides you depth of understanding - neither Taylor nor Hazel could develop and sequence coursework in a comprehensive STEM program, and they don't appreciate what they are giving up with canceling our countywide magnet programs.

This is true. A general curriculum development degree is not very useful

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

MVC

there are not enough students interested in MVC in each HS to offer it. If we had unlimited funding, sure. But, we don't. Plus, good luck finding good teachers to teach mvc at every HS.

I know nothing about MVC so am curious what folks think-- is it better to take MVC virtually from a good teacher (both good at teaching MVC and good at online teaching), or to take it locally with a poor or mediocre teacher?

(I know some individual kids really struggle with virtual learning, but I'm talking about the majority of kids here.)

I'm a university faculty, and I had supervised an undergrad from a mediocre university before through the REU program. He was in English major, but happened to take an astronomy class for fun, and the professor who taught that class found him smart, so recommended to me to do some data analysis work. He started to learn coding all by himself from scratch, and at the end of that summer, he completed his work and we finished a scientific paper together later that year. He applied to a graduate program for astronomy major in a prestigious university, and got an offer. Now he is a PhD candidate there. I once asked him why he chose English as his major. And he told me he had a really bad experience in Calc BC class back in HS, that made him hating math so much, until he took the astronomy class, and finally found his true love and true talent. This is how a good or a bad HS teacher could impact...

Okay, so is that a vote for prioritizing getting good teachers and having them teach virtually if you can't get enough good MVC teachers for all the high schools, over having an in-person MVC teacher at all high schools even if they're a bad teacher?

As a parent, my opinion doesn't matter. Ppl on this board said we should listen to Taylor or Hazel who have education PhDs and hence who should be the experts, neglecting the fact that they didn't know the magnet curriculum, and didn't care how to expand the curriculum nor how to train or find qualified teachers. Nicky Hazel even spelled "cosmology" wrong under the "STEM" example course offering in her slides (she spelled "cosmetology"). So whatever the hell.

Taylor doesn't have a PhD; he has an EdD (lower bar). Hazel has a master's degree.

Good grief he has a doctorate in education (a terminal degree) from the University of Virginia. Hazel’s masters is from the University of Pennsylvania. Are we really going to be snobs about their education or can we focus on substance.

These ED degrees are about admin, not curriculum. They don't know curriculum. And they are lost in the woods on this new regional system with regional programming. These programs are being made up on the fly. Too many changes, too quickly. And they are taking down flagship programs, for what? They could do the regional programs and still form cross-regional student cohorts for magnets.

There are EdD in curriculum and policy…

An education degree in curriculum does not provide a deep dive into specific content areas. Taylor was a social studies teacher and Hazel was an elementary school teacher for awhile. Teaching a content area is what provides you depth of understanding - neither Taylor nor Hazel could develop and sequence coursework in a comprehensive STEM program, and they don't appreciate what they are giving up with canceling our countywide magnet programs.

This is exactly what I want to say, but thanks a lot for saying it in a better way with more context. I don't know their teaching experience, but just through my observation since Tylor joined the show (yes, I've watched every BOE meeting since last summer) was that he is a good politician, but he couldn't care less about real education, real students and real teachers.

That is excessively harsh. My impression is that he does care but you have to be a politician to survive in this job. You will never even get hired for this job if you are not good at playing politics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

MVC

there are not enough students interested in MVC in each HS to offer it. If we had unlimited funding, sure. But, we don't. Plus, good luck finding good teachers to teach mvc at every HS.

I know nothing about MVC so am curious what folks think-- is it better to take MVC virtually from a good teacher (both good at teaching MVC and good at online teaching), or to take it locally with a poor or mediocre teacher?

(I know some individual kids really struggle with virtual learning, but I'm talking about the majority of kids here.)

I'm a university faculty, and I had supervised an undergrad from a mediocre university before through the REU program. He was in English major, but happened to take an astronomy class for fun, and the professor who taught that class found him smart, so recommended to me to do some data analysis work. He started to learn coding all by himself from scratch, and at the end of that summer, he completed his work and we finished a scientific paper together later that year. He applied to a graduate program for astronomy major in a prestigious university, and got an offer. Now he is a PhD candidate there. I once asked him why he chose English as his major. And he told me he had a really bad experience in Calc BC class back in HS, that made him hating math so much, until he took the astronomy class, and finally found his true love and true talent. This is how a good or a bad HS teacher could impact...

Okay, so is that a vote for prioritizing getting good teachers and having them teach virtually if you can't get enough good MVC teachers for all the high schools, over having an in-person MVC teacher at all high schools even if they're a bad teacher?

As a parent, my opinion doesn't matter. Ppl on this board said we should listen to Taylor or Hazel who have education PhDs and hence who should be the experts, neglecting the fact that they didn't know the magnet curriculum, and didn't care how to expand the curriculum nor how to train or find qualified teachers. Nicky Hazel even spelled "cosmology" wrong under the "STEM" example course offering in her slides (she spelled "cosmetology"). So whatever the hell.

Taylor doesn't have a PhD; he has an EdD (lower bar). Hazel has a master's degree.

Good grief he has a doctorate in education (a terminal degree) from the University of Virginia. Hazel’s masters is from the University of Pennsylvania. Are we really going to be snobs about their education or can we focus on substance.

These ED degrees are about admin, not curriculum. They don't know curriculum. And they are lost in the woods on this new regional system with regional programming. These programs are being made up on the fly. Too many changes, too quickly. And they are taking down flagship programs, for what? They could do the regional programs and still form cross-regional student cohorts for magnets.

There are EdD in curriculum and policy…

An education degree in curriculum does not provide a deep dive into specific content areas. Taylor was a social studies teacher and Hazel was an elementary school teacher for awhile. Teaching a content area is what provides you depth of understanding - neither Taylor nor Hazel could develop and sequence coursework in a comprehensive STEM program, and they don't appreciate what they are giving up with canceling our countywide magnet programs.

This is exactly what I want to say, but thanks a lot for saying it in a better way with more context. I don't know their teaching experience, but just through my observation since Tylor joined the show (yes, I've watched every BOE meeting since last summer) was that he is a good politician, but he couldn't care less about real education, real students and real teachers.

That is excessively harsh. My impression is that he does care but you have to be a politician to survive in this job. You will never even get hired for this job if you are not good at playing politics

If he cares, he needs to step up and fix things and stop just being there for PR and fire those who have been running it and doing a poor job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

Does MCPS have enough good math teachers to teach AP BC calc in every HS? There's a shortage of STEM teachers. I don't think MCPS can find enough good teachers for math.

My kid wanted to take AB Calc but the teacher was so bad that they downgraded to Applied Calc. A bad math teacher can make the class awful, and the kid to hate math.

Then fix that part. But saying that there shouldn't be an advanced math class in every HS is terrible. And yes some schools may only offer one AP calc class and have 10 kids. That's ok. But someone will complain that too many resources are used on the 10 kids in that school while a W school has to have 3 sections of 30 kids in calculus and won't get funding for a 4th.

40 kids to a class is normal. Be thankful your school has it. It’s not ok if they aren’t offering Mv and beyond while your school has multiple advanced classes. Why should my tax dollars fund your kids advance classes when my kids don’t get them?

Because your kid isn't smart enough to pass MV. Now, I said it!

dp

Except my kid is and already did bc.

So nobody should get it if your kid cannot? Is that really where we are at?

No, we are at all kids should have access to the same classes. So mine should get the same as yours. It’s unfair to kids who take bc sophomore year that they don’t have enough math classes to graduate.

So that means the magnets should be destroyed?

You have zero evidence the magnets are being destroyed. The world will not end if the current status quo changes from that which only kids from a few high school areas that are closest to the program sites attend. Ideally they'd change the narrow selection criteria as well so it's not focused only on MAP-R or MAP-M scores, which are not designed to measure cognitive ability.

Actually, the countywide magnets and SMCS will be destroyed. Said so during Q&A of the most recent BOE mtg. It is their plan NOT to replicate these programs.

They didn't say destroyed. They said they would all be regional, not countywide, and that each reguon would have some program that falls within the same magnet category (e.g., STEM).

The interpretation by some, here, is that there are not enough capable students, and perhaps not enough capable teachers, to support the same kinds of high-level & specialized classes that have been available at the county-wide/semi-county-wide magnets. That interpretation and the assumptions on which it is based are the subjects of debate.

The thing that MCPS hasn't clarified is whether each regional magnet will operate at the same level, not only as each other, but as the original county-wide/semi-county-wide magnets, offering similar, if not the same, depth, breadth and rigor to meet the needs of the highly able students attending. This reticence, combined with MCPS's history over the past 3 or so decades of withholding pertinet information to limit opposition to internally determined plans, lends credence to some of the concerns expressed, even if some of the underlying assumptions regarding the prevalence and dispersion of student and teacher capability might be incorrect. Deep, persistent questions on this issue, and the parallel issue of truly equitable access to local high-level courses outside of the magnets, should be, and, sadly, should already have been but were not, among the very first asked by the BOE.

https://mocoshow.com/2025/08/03/mcps-proposes-regional-high-school-magnet-plan/#more-113641

If a HS journalist understands that the countywide programs are about to be dismantled, I hope people can get past quibbling about semantics to understand that the countywide programs as they exist today will no longer be the same. For starters, I'd like to see if the new regional SMCS will be 7 or 8 periods or if they get watered down to simply STEM programs. That news comes out in Aug, possibly Sept. I'm also waiting to see what they propose for Poolesville Global Ecology.

These programs only are for a few select kids. But the new set up really isn't a good fix.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

MVC

there are not enough students interested in MVC in each HS to offer it. If we had unlimited funding, sure. But, we don't. Plus, good luck finding good teachers to teach mvc at every HS.

I know nothing about MVC so am curious what folks think-- is it better to take MVC virtually from a good teacher (both good at teaching MVC and good at online teaching), or to take it locally with a poor or mediocre teacher?

(I know some individual kids really struggle with virtual learning, but I'm talking about the majority of kids here.)

I'm a university faculty, and I had supervised an undergrad from a mediocre university before through the REU program. He was in English major, but happened to take an astronomy class for fun, and the professor who taught that class found him smart, so recommended to me to do some data analysis work. He started to learn coding all by himself from scratch, and at the end of that summer, he completed his work and we finished a scientific paper together later that year. He applied to a graduate program for astronomy major in a prestigious university, and got an offer. Now he is a PhD candidate there. I once asked him why he chose English as his major. And he told me he had a really bad experience in Calc BC class back in HS, that made him hating math so much, until he took the astronomy class, and finally found his true love and true talent. This is how a good or a bad HS teacher could impact...

Okay, so is that a vote for prioritizing getting good teachers and having them teach virtually if you can't get enough good MVC teachers for all the high schools, over having an in-person MVC teacher at all high schools even if they're a bad teacher?

As a parent, my opinion doesn't matter. Ppl on this board said we should listen to Taylor or Hazel who have education PhDs and hence who should be the experts, neglecting the fact that they didn't know the magnet curriculum, and didn't care how to expand the curriculum nor how to train or find qualified teachers. Nicky Hazel even spelled "cosmology" wrong under the "STEM" example course offering in her slides (she spelled "cosmetology"). So whatever the hell.

Taylor doesn't have a PhD; he has an EdD (lower bar). Hazel has a master's degree.

Good grief he has a doctorate in education (a terminal degree) from the University of Virginia. Hazel’s masters is from the University of Pennsylvania. Are we really going to be snobs about their education or can we focus on substance.

These ED degrees are about admin, not curriculum. They don't know curriculum. And they are lost in the woods on this new regional system with regional programming. These programs are being made up on the fly. Too many changes, too quickly. And they are taking down flagship programs, for what? They could do the regional programs and still form cross-regional student cohorts for magnets.

And mcps hires “instructional specialists” with degrees from Kaplan and Capella University…

And, strayer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

Does MCPS have enough good math teachers to teach AP BC calc in every HS? There's a shortage of STEM teachers. I don't think MCPS can find enough good teachers for math.

My kid wanted to take AB Calc but the teacher was so bad that they downgraded to Applied Calc. A bad math teacher can make the class awful, and the kid to hate math.

Then fix that part. But saying that there shouldn't be an advanced math class in every HS is terrible. And yes some schools may only offer one AP calc class and have 10 kids. That's ok. But someone will complain that too many resources are used on the 10 kids in that school while a W school has to have 3 sections of 30 kids in calculus and won't get funding for a 4th.

40 kids to a class is normal. Be thankful your school has it. It’s not ok if they aren’t offering Mv and beyond while your school has multiple advanced classes. Why should my tax dollars fund your kids advance classes when my kids don’t get them?

Because your kid isn't smart enough to pass MV. Now, I said it!

dp

Except my kid is and already did bc.

So nobody should get it if your kid cannot? Is that really where we are at?

No, we are at all kids should have access to the same classes. So mine should get the same as yours. It’s unfair to kids who take bc sophomore year that they don’t have enough math classes to graduate.

So that means the magnets should be destroyed?

You have zero evidence the magnets are being destroyed. The world will not end if the current status quo changes from that which only kids from a few high school areas that are closest to the program sites attend. Ideally they'd change the narrow selection criteria as well so it's not focused only on MAP-R or MAP-M scores, which are not designed to measure cognitive ability.

Actually, the countywide magnets and SMCS will be destroyed. Said so during Q&A of the most recent BOE mtg. It is their plan NOT to replicate these programs.

They didn't say destroyed. They said they would all be regional, not countywide, and that each reguon would have some program that falls within the same magnet category (e.g., STEM).

The interpretation by some, here, is that there are not enough capable students, and perhaps not enough capable teachers, to support the same kinds of high-level & specialized classes that have been available at the county-wide/semi-county-wide magnets. That interpretation and the assumptions on which it is based are the subjects of debate.

The thing that MCPS hasn't clarified is whether each regional magnet will operate at the same level, not only as each other, but as the original county-wide/semi-county-wide magnets, offering similar, if not the same, depth, breadth and rigor to meet the needs of the highly able students attending. This reticence, combined with MCPS's history over the past 3 or so decades of withholding pertinet information to limit opposition to internally determined plans, lends credence to some of the concerns expressed, even if some of the underlying assumptions regarding the prevalence and dispersion of student and teacher capability might be incorrect. Deep, persistent questions on this issue, and the parallel issue of truly equitable access to local high-level courses outside of the magnets, should be, and, sadly, should already have been but were not, among the very first asked by the BOE.

Yes, this is my concern. Say they kept the current countywide magnets exactly as-is, but open to only the students in those new regions. And then each region offered something in the content area, but not at the level of the current program. Doesn’t that just reduce even the possibility of access for most of the county?

Sorry, top 10% art kid in region 2. VAC still exists, but not for you. Have this other, yet-to-be-defined, art program instead. Who needs a 50-year history and proven success? Not you!

Want the VAC, move to the area. Simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

MVC

there are not enough students interested in MVC in each HS to offer it. If we had unlimited funding, sure. But, we don't. Plus, good luck finding good teachers to teach mvc at every HS.

I know nothing about MVC so am curious what folks think-- is it better to take MVC virtually from a good teacher (both good at teaching MVC and good at online teaching), or to take it locally with a poor or mediocre teacher?

(I know some individual kids really struggle with virtual learning, but I'm talking about the majority of kids here.)

I'm a university faculty, and I had supervised an undergrad from a mediocre university before through the REU program. He was in English major, but happened to take an astronomy class for fun, and the professor who taught that class found him smart, so recommended to me to do some data analysis work. He started to learn coding all by himself from scratch, and at the end of that summer, he completed his work and we finished a scientific paper together later that year. He applied to a graduate program for astronomy major in a prestigious university, and got an offer. Now he is a PhD candidate there. I once asked him why he chose English as his major. And he told me he had a really bad experience in Calc BC class back in HS, that made him hating math so much, until he took the astronomy class, and finally found his true love and true talent. This is how a good or a bad HS teacher could impact...

Okay, so is that a vote for prioritizing getting good teachers and having them teach virtually if you can't get enough good MVC teachers for all the high schools, over having an in-person MVC teacher at all high schools even if they're a bad teacher?

As a parent, my opinion doesn't matter. Ppl on this board said we should listen to Taylor or Hazel who have education PhDs and hence who should be the experts, neglecting the fact that they didn't know the magnet curriculum, and didn't care how to expand the curriculum nor how to train or find qualified teachers. Nicky Hazel even spelled "cosmology" wrong under the "STEM" example course offering in her slides (she spelled "cosmetology"). So whatever the hell.

Taylor doesn't have a PhD; he has an EdD (lower bar). Hazel has a master's degree.

Good grief he has a doctorate in education (a terminal degree) from the University of Virginia. Hazel’s masters is from the University of Pennsylvania. Are we really going to be snobs about their education or can we focus on substance.

These ED degrees are about admin, not curriculum. They don't know curriculum. And they are lost in the woods on this new regional system with regional programming. These programs are being made up on the fly. Too many changes, too quickly. And they are taking down flagship programs, for what? They could do the regional programs and still form cross-regional student cohorts for magnets.

There are EdD in curriculum and policy…

An education degree in curriculum does not provide a deep dive into specific content areas. Taylor was a social studies teacher and Hazel was an elementary school teacher for awhile. Teaching a content area is what provides you depth of understanding - neither Taylor nor Hazel could develop and sequence coursework in a comprehensive STEM program, and they don't appreciate what they are giving up with canceling our countywide magnet programs.

This is exactly what I want to say, but thanks a lot for saying it in a better way with more context. I don't know their teaching experience, but just through my observation since Tylor joined the show (yes, I've watched every BOE meeting since last summer) was that he is a good politician, but he couldn't care less about real education, real students and real teachers.

That is excessively harsh. My impression is that he does care but you have to be a politician to survive in this job. You will never even get hired for this job if you are not good at playing politics

If he cares, he needs to step up and fix things and stop just being there for PR and fire those who have been running it and doing a poor job.

Agreed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

Does MCPS have enough good math teachers to teach AP BC calc in every HS? There's a shortage of STEM teachers. I don't think MCPS can find enough good teachers for math.

My kid wanted to take AB Calc but the teacher was so bad that they downgraded to Applied Calc. A bad math teacher can make the class awful, and the kid to hate math.

Then fix that part. But saying that there shouldn't be an advanced math class in every HS is terrible. And yes some schools may only offer one AP calc class and have 10 kids. That's ok. But someone will complain that too many resources are used on the 10 kids in that school while a W school has to have 3 sections of 30 kids in calculus and won't get funding for a 4th.

40 kids to a class is normal. Be thankful your school has it. It’s not ok if they aren’t offering Mv and beyond while your school has multiple advanced classes. Why should my tax dollars fund your kids advance classes when my kids don’t get them?

Because your kid isn't smart enough to pass MV. Now, I said it!

dp

Except my kid is and already did bc.

So nobody should get it if your kid cannot? Is that really where we are at?

No, we are at all kids should have access to the same classes. So mine should get the same as yours. It’s unfair to kids who take bc sophomore year that they don’t have enough math classes to graduate.

So that means the magnets should be destroyed?

You have zero evidence the magnets are being destroyed. The world will not end if the current status quo changes from that which only kids from a few high school areas that are closest to the program sites attend. Ideally they'd change the narrow selection criteria as well so it's not focused only on MAP-R or MAP-M scores, which are not designed to measure cognitive ability.

Actually, the countywide magnets and SMCS will be destroyed. Said so during Q&A of the most recent BOE mtg. It is their plan NOT to replicate these programs.

That's not the same thing. Please stop spreading misinformation.

+1. Currently the magnet programs are concentrated with students from just a few schools that live nearer to the program site. Talented students can come from all over the county, not just those who are able to commute easily to the location.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

Does MCPS have enough good math teachers to teach AP BC calc in every HS? There's a shortage of STEM teachers. I don't think MCPS can find enough good teachers for math.

My kid wanted to take AB Calc but the teacher was so bad that they downgraded to Applied Calc. A bad math teacher can make the class awful, and the kid to hate math.

Then fix that part. But saying that there shouldn't be an advanced math class in every HS is terrible. And yes some schools may only offer one AP calc class and have 10 kids. That's ok. But someone will complain that too many resources are used on the 10 kids in that school while a W school has to have 3 sections of 30 kids in calculus and won't get funding for a 4th.

A HS doesn’t need to have THE most advanced math offerings. It has to have a path to deliver those to students who need them even if it means said student(s) attend virtually or on a college campus. And given the level of tutoring that goes on at some of these schools, some of these kids would do well to slow down instead of rushing to MV or Linear Algebra.

People are going to complain no matter what. So let’s acknowledge that, accept it, and move on. Kids in all parts of the county should be able to get a well rounded education that sets them up to be competitive post HS regardless if they choose college or career. That’s the base. All kids should have access to enriching and challenging opportunities (field trips, clubs/organizations, capstones with supporting classes, etc).

Until that is worked out I care zero about offering classes like Linear Algebra or Organic Chemistry. And frankly, I haven’t spoken with anyone on the collegiate level who is seeking or requiring students to have tackled such in order to be competitive. Yes I want gifted and advanced students to be challenged, but that doesn’t mean that every option is going to be available at the HS level.

Agreed. No one needs to take MV Calc in high school.

And, yes, both my kids took BC Calc in 11th. One had access to MV in 12th and one didn’t. It’s fine.

So, by your logic no one should get advanced classes or Mv. No, it should be offered at all schools. Mcps has an obligation to provide four years of math as a graduation requirement.

And, yes, it’s needed for the better stem colleges.

Take those classes through dual enrollment at Montgomery College. Paid for by MCPS.

How do they get there? How does that work as if you take 6 Mcps classes that only leaves evenings and kids have activities, sports and homework. The school day does not align. Mcps still has to pay for those classes.

Paying for the class vs having to offer it everywhere are two entirely different things. Especially when it’s a class that a small percentage of students need or want and more likely better services at the collegiate level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:make sure you're looking at the most recent region groupings. The link on the MCPS message to region maps was an old version. Not all regions are east-to-west anymore.

Do you have a link to the new maps?

Starting on slide 23: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ4P6782A9/$file/Sec%20Prog%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Engaga%20Plan%20Update%20250724%20PPT.pdf

So, they are going with option #5? - pg 26.

DP. Yes. I think these boundaries balance higher and lower SES, and harmony of communities as much as possible. You cannot ignore harmony. I know a student from a very different community who was bussed into a program due to its opportunity at the insistence of their parent. That student was miserable and was elated at switching to a school community they could better resonate with at the first opportunity.

No one wants forced bussing. The best option is to put more money in the schools that don’t have much and make them equal. The disparities are significant. A smart kid at a w school can get all their classes and academics met. A smart kid dcc is forced to another school, Mc or go without. They don’t allow homeschooling or independent study or virtual classes outside Mcps. Or, at least being back virtual so it aligns with MCPS schedules.

The demographics are changing in mcps in the dcc due to crazy housing prices.

Blair is a great program but not for all kids. Not all kids want a magnet and prefer to choose their own classes and those kids should get the same opportunities. One reason why dcc kids try for Blair is the other schools don’t have the academics and they leave which causes the low scores.

I think this is part of what MCPS is trying to figure out, and I credit Taylor with at least tackling it. My understanding is that they are going to make sure every school has a baseline number of advanced classes, and that they are currently auditing what is available where.

But we also need to be realistic and aim for what is possible. I think making sure every HS has AP Calculus BC is sufficient, and then bringing back virtual for MVC for some kids.

What other courses do you think every school should be offering?

MVC

there are not enough students interested in MVC in each HS to offer it. If we had unlimited funding, sure. But, we don't. Plus, good luck finding good teachers to teach mvc at every HS.

I know nothing about MVC so am curious what folks think-- is it better to take MVC virtually from a good teacher (both good at teaching MVC and good at online teaching), or to take it locally with a poor or mediocre teacher?

(I know some individual kids really struggle with virtual learning, but I'm talking about the majority of kids here.)

I'm a university faculty, and I had supervised an undergrad from a mediocre university before through the REU program. He was in English major, but happened to take an astronomy class for fun, and the professor who taught that class found him smart, so recommended to me to do some data analysis work. He started to learn coding all by himself from scratch, and at the end of that summer, he completed his work and we finished a scientific paper together later that year. He applied to a graduate program for astronomy major in a prestigious university, and got an offer. Now he is a PhD candidate there. I once asked him why he chose English as his major. And he told me he had a really bad experience in Calc BC class back in HS, that made him hating math so much, until he took the astronomy class, and finally found his true love and true talent. This is how a good or a bad HS teacher could impact...

Okay, so is that a vote for prioritizing getting good teachers and having them teach virtually if you can't get enough good MVC teachers for all the high schools, over having an in-person MVC teacher at all high schools even if they're a bad teacher?

As a parent, my opinion doesn't matter. Ppl on this board said we should listen to Taylor or Hazel who have education PhDs and hence who should be the experts, neglecting the fact that they didn't know the magnet curriculum, and didn't care how to expand the curriculum nor how to train or find qualified teachers. Nicky Hazel even spelled "cosmology" wrong under the "STEM" example course offering in her slides (she spelled "cosmetology"). So whatever the hell.

Taylor doesn't have a PhD; he has an EdD (lower bar). Hazel has a master's degree.

Good grief he has a doctorate in education (a terminal degree) from the University of Virginia. Hazel’s masters is from the University of Pennsylvania. Are we really going to be snobs about their education or can we focus on substance.

These ED degrees are about admin, not curriculum. They don't know curriculum. And they are lost in the woods on this new regional system with regional programming. These programs are being made up on the fly. Too many changes, too quickly. And they are taking down flagship programs, for what? They could do the regional programs and still form cross-regional student cohorts for magnets.

But they do have folks in staff who do know about curriculum.