Blind item: Regional criteria "magnets" will be lottery

[Anonymous]

I think we will just see a lot of applications to whatever the strongest HS is in the region regardless of program. People might gamble on an existing school program right now since it has staff and history. I do not imagine anyone believes lottery STEM at low rank school = Blair SMCS. If you are at a low ranked school you might try anything at a W school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taylor specifically said they would not turn away students and that they would not be operating with a scarcity model. Plus, he said there are no caps on seats.

So it sounded like admissions was pretty much going to be an open door and no one would be rejected.

This is like when they say they are providing transportation. It isn’t actually the full true story. They can’t have unlimited seats for these programs.

The question is about criteria. I actually have no problem if they have as many seats as they need to accommodate all applicants who are as qualified and prepared as the current program students. The issue is when they have so much room or maybe not so much interest that they lower the criteria. Which is how you end up with underperforming programs, like some of the regional IB programs.

Exactly. The question is about criteria. I asked Jennie Franklin last winter during one in-person info session: as you are assigning similar program size, how do you set up the qualification criteria? Student stats and number of students who are interested in STEM will be significantly higher than another region (yes, I'm talking about scenarios like Region 4 vs. Region 5, but I don't want to offend anyone). So do you apply different criteria? Or do you use lottery for the former region? Jennie didn't give me an answer. She hasn't thought about this back then. Applying different criteria is what's CES and MS magnet is doing, and you'll end us with very different student body no matter you then run a lottery or not. This student body will be significantly stronger in academics and more suitable for adapting into the current SMCS curriculum where the future STEM program will most likely be successful.

I agree that stats will be different, but interest? I think you'd be surprised.

This is your guess based on your limited personal experience in your friendship circle. Central office did run a survey last spring to ask you select the top program themes that you'll be interested in. They did presented the ranking, but if I recall correctly, it's not breaking down into different regions nor parents/students/educators. The only purpose of the survey is to showcase that hey, people are interested. And then they run full-speed ahead with the agenda in their mind.

But they didn’t say these programs would be the ONLY way for a child to access high level courses. Why can’t we have good quality regular high schools in every building?

I agree with you totally! Why can't every HS provide high level courses? Why do you have to apply and get accepted into a STEM/humanity program in order to access high level courses? If you apply and you have strong stats and strong interests, and lottery kicks you out?

If you are in a W school, Blair or Wheaton you get stem. If you aren't, too bad.

Somewhere there is a list of higher level courses that will be offered at all schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taylor specifically said they would not turn away students and that they would not be operating with a scarcity model. Plus, he said there are no caps on seats.

So it sounded like admissions was pretty much going to be an open door and no one would be rejected.

This is like when they say they are providing transportation. It isn’t actually the full true story. They can’t have unlimited seats for these programs.

The question is about criteria. I actually have no problem if they have as many seats as they need to accommodate all applicants who are as qualified and prepared as the current program students. The issue is when they have so much room or maybe not so much interest that they lower the criteria. Which is how you end up with underperforming programs, like some of the regional IB programs.

Exactly. The question is about criteria. I asked Jennie Franklin last winter during one in-person info session: as you are assigning similar program size, how do you set up the qualification criteria? Student stats and number of students who are interested in STEM will be significantly higher than another region (yes, I'm talking about scenarios like Region 4 vs. Region 5, but I don't want to offend anyone). So do you apply different criteria? Or do you use lottery for the former region? Jennie didn't give me an answer. She hasn't thought about this back then. Applying different criteria is what's CES and MS magnet is doing, and you'll end us with very different student body no matter you then run a lottery or not. This student body will be significantly stronger in academics and more suitable for adapting into the current SMCS curriculum where the future STEM program will most likely be successful.

I agree that stats will be different, but interest? I think you'd be surprised.

This is your guess based on your limited personal experience in your friendship circle. Central office did run a survey last spring to ask you select the top program themes that you'll be interested in. They did presented the ranking, but if I recall correctly, it's not breaking down into different regions nor parents/students/educators. The only purpose of the survey is to showcase that hey, people are interested. And then they run full-speed ahead with the agenda in their mind.

But they didn’t say these programs would be the ONLY way for a child to access high level courses. Why can’t we have good quality regular high schools in every building?

I agree with you totally! Why can't every HS provide high level courses? Why do you have to apply and get accepted into a STEM/humanity program in order to access high level courses? If you apply and you have strong stats and strong interests, and lottery kicks you out?

If you are in a W school, Blair or Wheaton you get stem. If you aren't, too bad.

Somewhere there is a list of higher level courses that will be offered at all schools

Yes, but MVC Mom doesn't consider AP Calc BC to be higher level.

[Anonymous]

A lottery school is substantially less prestigious, and smells of crooked admissions.

Has anyone actually seen the big power ball bucket they draw from?

That's what I thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taylor specifically said they would not turn away students and that they would not be operating with a scarcity model. Plus, he said there are no caps on seats.

So it sounded like admissions was pretty much going to be an open door and no one would be rejected.

This is like when they say they are providing transportation. It isn’t actually the full true story. They can’t have unlimited seats for these programs.

The question is about criteria. I actually have no problem if they have as many seats as they need to accommodate all applicants who are as qualified and prepared as the current program students. The issue is when they have so much room or maybe not so much interest that they lower the criteria. Which is how you end up with underperforming programs, like some of the regional IB programs.

Exactly. The question is about criteria. I asked Jennie Franklin last winter during one in-person info session: as you are assigning similar program size, how do you set up the qualification criteria? Student stats and number of students who are interested in STEM will be significantly higher than another region (yes, I'm talking about scenarios like Region 4 vs. Region 5, but I don't want to offend anyone). So do you apply different criteria? Or do you use lottery for the former region? Jennie didn't give me an answer. She hasn't thought about this back then. Applying different criteria is what's CES and MS magnet is doing, and you'll end us with very different student body no matter you then run a lottery or not. This student body will be significantly stronger in academics and more suitable for adapting into the current SMCS curriculum where the future STEM program will most likely be successful.

I agree that stats will be different, but interest? I think you'd be surprised.

This is your guess based on your limited personal experience in your friendship circle. Central office did run a survey last spring to ask you select the top program themes that you'll be interested in. They did presented the ranking, but if I recall correctly, it's not breaking down into different regions nor parents/students/educators. The only purpose of the survey is to showcase that hey, people are interested. And then they run full-speed ahead with the agenda in their mind.

But they didn’t say these programs would be the ONLY way for a child to access high level courses. Why can’t we have good quality regular high schools in every building?

I agree with you totally! Why can't every HS provide high level courses? Why do you have to apply and get accepted into a STEM/humanity program in order to access high level courses? If you apply and you have strong stats and strong interests, and lottery kicks you out?

If you are in a W school, Blair or Wheaton you get stem. If you aren't, too bad.

Somewhere there is a list of higher level courses that will be offered at all schools

Yes, but MVC Mom doesn't consider AP Calc BC to be higher level.

Is it equitable that students from more wealthy areas are offered the opportunity to take MVC at their HS if their Mathematics path puts them there while the same school system denies that opportunity to similarly able/prepared/interested students from less wealthy areas?

-- Not MVC Mom

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taylor specifically said they would not turn away students and that they would not be operating with a scarcity model. Plus, he said there are no caps on seats.

So it sounded like admissions was pretty much going to be an open door and no one would be rejected.

This is like when they say they are providing transportation. It isn’t actually the full true story. They can’t have unlimited seats for these programs.

The question is about criteria. I actually have no problem if they have as many seats as they need to accommodate all applicants who are as qualified and prepared as the current program students. The issue is when they have so much room or maybe not so much interest that they lower the criteria. Which is how you end up with underperforming programs, like some of the regional IB programs.

Exactly. The question is about criteria. I asked Jennie Franklin last winter during one in-person info session: as you are assigning similar program size, how do you set up the qualification criteria? Student stats and number of students who are interested in STEM will be significantly higher than another region (yes, I'm talking about scenarios like Region 4 vs. Region 5, but I don't want to offend anyone). So do you apply different criteria? Or do you use lottery for the former region? Jennie didn't give me an answer. She hasn't thought about this back then. Applying different criteria is what's CES and MS magnet is doing, and you'll end us with very different student body no matter you then run a lottery or not. This student body will be significantly stronger in academics and more suitable for adapting into the current SMCS curriculum where the future STEM program will most likely be successful.

I agree that stats will be different, but interest? I think you'd be surprised.

This is your guess based on your limited personal experience in your friendship circle. Central office did run a survey last spring to ask you select the top program themes that you'll be interested in. They did presented the ranking, but if I recall correctly, it's not breaking down into different regions nor parents/students/educators. The only purpose of the survey is to showcase that hey, people are interested. And then they run full-speed ahead with the agenda in their mind.

But they didn’t say these programs would be the ONLY way for a child to access high level courses. Why can’t we have good quality regular high schools in every building?

I agree with you totally! Why can't every HS provide high level courses? Why do you have to apply and get accepted into a STEM/humanity program in order to access high level courses? If you apply and you have strong stats and strong interests, and lottery kicks you out?

If you are in a W school, Blair or Wheaton you get stem. If you aren't, too bad.

Somewhere there is a list of higher level courses that will be offered at all schools

I remember seeing AP Calc and AP Stat were promised to be offered in every HS, but couldn't recall if they promise anything beyond that? What about AP Chem, AP Bio, AP Phys C? I would consider those as standard high-level STEM courses, and MCPS honor course is always a joke so please don't count those in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taylor specifically said they would not turn away students and that they would not be operating with a scarcity model. Plus, he said there are no caps on seats.

So it sounded like admissions was pretty much going to be an open door and no one would be rejected.

This is like when they say they are providing transportation. It isn’t actually the full true story. They can’t have unlimited seats for these programs.

The question is about criteria. I actually have no problem if they have as many seats as they need to accommodate all applicants who are as qualified and prepared as the current program students. The issue is when they have so much room or maybe not so much interest that they lower the criteria. Which is how you end up with underperforming programs, like some of the regional IB programs.

Exactly. The question is about criteria. I asked Jennie Franklin last winter during one in-person info session: as you are assigning similar program size, how do you set up the qualification criteria? Student stats and number of students who are interested in STEM will be significantly higher than another region (yes, I'm talking about scenarios like Region 4 vs. Region 5, but I don't want to offend anyone). So do you apply different criteria? Or do you use lottery for the former region? Jennie didn't give me an answer. She hasn't thought about this back then. Applying different criteria is what's CES and MS magnet is doing, and you'll end us with very different student body no matter you then run a lottery or not. This student body will be significantly stronger in academics and more suitable for adapting into the current SMCS curriculum where the future STEM program will most likely be successful.

I agree that stats will be different, but interest? I think you'd be surprised.

This is your guess based on your limited personal experience in your friendship circle. Central office did run a survey last spring to ask you select the top program themes that you'll be interested in. They did presented the ranking, but if I recall correctly, it's not breaking down into different regions nor parents/students/educators. The only purpose of the survey is to showcase that hey, people are interested. And then they run full-speed ahead with the agenda in their mind.

But they didn’t say these programs would be the ONLY way for a child to access high level courses. Why can’t we have good quality regular high schools in every building?

I agree with you totally! Why can't every HS provide high level courses? Why do you have to apply and get accepted into a STEM/humanity program in order to access high level courses? If you apply and you have strong stats and strong interests, and lottery kicks you out?

If you are in a W school, Blair or Wheaton you get stem. If you aren't, too bad.

Somewhere there is a list of higher level courses that will be offered at all schools

Yes, but MVC Mom doesn't consider AP Calc BC to be higher level.

Is it equitable that students from more wealthy areas are offered the opportunity to take MVC at their HS if their Mathematics path puts them there while the same school system denies that opportunity to similarly able/prepared/interested students from less wealthy areas?

-- Not MVC Mom

Churchill parent here. As far as I know, Churchill offers MVC while Wootton does not. I would think Wootton tends to have more math-advanced students than Churchill in general. So not all wealthy HSs offer that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taylor specifically said they would not turn away students and that they would not be operating with a scarcity model. Plus, he said there are no caps on seats.

So it sounded like admissions was pretty much going to be an open door and no one would be rejected.

This is like when they say they are providing transportation. It isn’t actually the full true story. They can’t have unlimited seats for these programs.

The question is about criteria. I actually have no problem if they have as many seats as they need to accommodate all applicants who are as qualified and prepared as the current program students. The issue is when they have so much room or maybe not so much interest that they lower the criteria. Which is how you end up with underperforming programs, like some of the regional IB programs.

Exactly. The question is about criteria. I asked Jennie Franklin last winter during one in-person info session: as you are assigning similar program size, how do you set up the qualification criteria? Student stats and number of students who are interested in STEM will be significantly higher than another region (yes, I'm talking about scenarios like Region 4 vs. Region 5, but I don't want to offend anyone). So do you apply different criteria? Or do you use lottery for the former region? Jennie didn't give me an answer. She hasn't thought about this back then. Applying different criteria is what's CES and MS magnet is doing, and you'll end us with very different student body no matter you then run a lottery or not. This student body will be significantly stronger in academics and more suitable for adapting into the current SMCS curriculum where the future STEM program will most likely be successful.

I agree that stats will be different, but interest? I think you'd be surprised.

This is your guess based on your limited personal experience in your friendship circle. Central office did run a survey last spring to ask you select the top program themes that you'll be interested in. They did presented the ranking, but if I recall correctly, it's not breaking down into different regions nor parents/students/educators. The only purpose of the survey is to showcase that hey, people are interested. And then they run full-speed ahead with the agenda in their mind.

But they didn’t say these programs would be the ONLY way for a child to access high level courses. Why can’t we have good quality regular high schools in every building?

I agree with you totally! Why can't every HS provide high level courses? Why do you have to apply and get accepted into a STEM/humanity program in order to access high level courses? If you apply and you have strong stats and strong interests, and lottery kicks you out?

If you are in a W school, Blair or Wheaton you get stem. If you aren't, too bad.

Somewhere there is a list of higher level courses that will be offered at all schools

I remember seeing AP Calc and AP Stat were promised to be offered in every HS, but couldn't recall if they promise anything beyond that? What about AP Chem, AP Bio, AP Phys C? I would consider those as standard high-level STEM courses, and MCPS honor course is always a joke so please don't count those in.

AP Research, the more rigorous flavors of the IB courses, etc., etc.

The idea should be similar access to equivalent rigor for any student, no matter where they end up going to school, with the magnet programs, while being the only true differentiator in offerings, also not being relied upon, broadly, to deliver those higher-level experiences. Otherwise, either they leave populations with unaddressed needs or they have to make the available magnet seating so large as to completely imbalance facility utilization and vastly expand the transportation infrastructure.

Or they can just give up on equity. Oh, wait...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taylor specifically said they would not turn away students and that they would not be operating with a scarcity model. Plus, he said there are no caps on seats.

So it sounded like admissions was pretty much going to be an open door and no one would be rejected.

This is like when they say they are providing transportation. It isn’t actually the full true story. They can’t have unlimited seats for these programs.

The question is about criteria. I actually have no problem if they have as many seats as they need to accommodate all applicants who are as qualified and prepared as the current program students. The issue is when they have so much room or maybe not so much interest that they lower the criteria. Which is how you end up with underperforming programs, like some of the regional IB programs.

Exactly. The question is about criteria. I asked Jennie Franklin last winter during one in-person info session: as you are assigning similar program size, how do you set up the qualification criteria? Student stats and number of students who are interested in STEM will be significantly higher than another region (yes, I'm talking about scenarios like Region 4 vs. Region 5, but I don't want to offend anyone). So do you apply different criteria? Or do you use lottery for the former region? Jennie didn't give me an answer. She hasn't thought about this back then. Applying different criteria is what's CES and MS magnet is doing, and you'll end us with very different student body no matter you then run a lottery or not. This student body will be significantly stronger in academics and more suitable for adapting into the current SMCS curriculum where the future STEM program will most likely be successful.

I agree that stats will be different, but interest? I think you'd be surprised.

This is your guess based on your limited personal experience in your friendship circle. Central office did run a survey last spring to ask you select the top program themes that you'll be interested in. They did presented the ranking, but if I recall correctly, it's not breaking down into different regions nor parents/students/educators. The only purpose of the survey is to showcase that hey, people are interested. And then they run full-speed ahead with the agenda in their mind.

But they didn’t say these programs would be the ONLY way for a child to access high level courses. Why can’t we have good quality regular high schools in every building?

I agree with you totally! Why can't every HS provide high level courses? Why do you have to apply and get accepted into a STEM/humanity program in order to access high level courses? If you apply and you have strong stats and strong interests, and lottery kicks you out?

If you are in a W school, Blair or Wheaton you get stem. If you aren't, too bad.

Somewhere there is a list of higher level courses that will be offered at all schools

I remember seeing AP Calc and AP Stat were promised to be offered in every HS, but couldn't recall if they promise anything beyond that? What about AP Chem, AP Bio, AP Phys C? I would consider those as standard high-level STEM courses, and MCPS honor course is always a joke so please don't count those in.

AP Research, the more rigorous flavors of the IB courses, etc., etc.

The idea should be similar access to equivalent rigor for any student, no matter where they end up going to school, with the magnet programs, while being the only true differentiator in offerings, also not being relied upon, broadly, to deliver those higher-level experiences. Otherwise, either they leave populations with unaddressed needs or they have to make the available magnet seating so large as to completely imbalance facility utilization and vastly expand the transportation infrastructure.

Or they can just give up on equity. Oh, wait...

Haha, couldn't agree more.
And CO still has this deep bias that magnet course == high-level rigorous STEM course. None of the magnet course prepares student for AP testing. Some of them, if the student can complete with an A or B grade, mean that they should be able to secure a 5 or 4 on certain AP tests. Most of them doesn't cover even half of the AP test content. This is the biggest misunderstanding that non-SMCS parents and CO have had. If future STEM programs adopt the current SMCS courses to a large extent, students will find they couldn't score beyond 3 for AP-STEM tests unless they self-study significant amount of knowledge in afterschool and weekend hours.

[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:Taylor specifically said they would not turn away students and that they would not be operating with a scarcity model. Plus, he said there are no caps on seats.

So it sounded like admissions was pretty much going to be an open door and no one would be rejected.

This is like when they say they are providing transportation. It isn’t actually the full true story. They can’t have unlimited seats for these programs.

The question is about criteria. I actually have no problem if they have as many seats as they need to accommodate all applicants who are as qualified and prepared as the current program students. The issue is when they have so much room or maybe not so much interest that they lower the criteria. Which is how you end up with underperforming programs, like some of the regional IB programs.

Exactly. The question is about criteria. I asked Jennie Franklin last winter during one in-person info session: as you are assigning similar program size, how do you set up the qualification criteria? Student stats and number of students who are interested in STEM will be significantly higher than another region (yes, I'm talking about scenarios like Region 4 vs. Region 5, but I don't want to offend anyone). So do you apply different criteria? Or do you use lottery for the former region? Jennie didn't give me an answer. She hasn't thought about this back then. Applying different criteria is what's CES and MS magnet is doing, and you'll end us with very different student body no matter you then run a lottery or not. This student body will be significantly stronger in academics and more suitable for adapting into the current SMCS curriculum where the future STEM program will most likely be successful.

I agree that stats will be different, but interest? I think you'd be surprised.

This is your guess based on your limited personal experience in your friendship circle. Central office did run a survey last spring to ask you select the top program themes that you'll be interested in. They did presented the ranking, but if I recall correctly, it's not breaking down into different regions nor parents/students/educators. The only purpose of the survey is to showcase that hey, people are interested. And then they run full-speed ahead with the agenda in their mind.

But they didn’t say these programs would be the ONLY way for a child to access high level courses. Why can’t we have good quality regular high schools in every building?

I agree with you totally! Why can't every HS provide high level courses? Why do you have to apply and get accepted into a STEM/humanity program in order to access high level courses? If you apply and you have strong stats and strong interests, and lottery kicks you out?

If you are in a W school, Blair or Wheaton you get stem. If you aren't, too bad.

Somewhere there is a list of higher level courses that will be offered at all schools

Yes, but MVC Mom doesn't consider AP Calc BC to be higher level.

Is it equitable that students from more wealthy areas are offered the opportunity to take MVC at their HS if their Mathematics path puts them there while the same school system denies that opportunity to similarly able/prepared/interested students from less wealthy areas?

-- Not MVC Mom

Churchill parent here. As far as I know, Churchill offers MVC while Wootton does not. I would think Wootton tends to have more math-advanced students than Churchill in general. So not all wealthy HSs offer that.

But you bring up a case in point. Churchill. Whitman. What do these schools have in common? The greatest concentrations of wealth and the widest advanced offerings exclusive of those at magnets.

Though there may be counterexamples, any reasonable analysis of the data will show that clear, strong correlation. Why should a public school system not be serving, equivalently, individuals from less wealthy areas as it does those from more wealthy areas? The current paradigm reinforces privilege, accruing disproportionate benefit of public services to those with the most, and the plan MCPS has proffered, as is, will continue that, quite unnecessarily.

[Anonymous]

Wootton parent here. They do offer a MVC/DifEQ class but not the advanced SMCS math courses.

[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:Taylor specifically said they would not turn away students and that they would not be operating with a scarcity model. Plus, he said there are no caps on seats.

So it sounded like admissions was pretty much going to be an open door and no one would be rejected.

This is like when they say they are providing transportation. It isn’t actually the full true story. They can’t have unlimited seats for these programs.

The question is about criteria. I actually have no problem if they have as many seats as they need to accommodate all applicants who are as qualified and prepared as the current program students. The issue is when they have so much room or maybe not so much interest that they lower the criteria. Which is how you end up with underperforming programs, like some of the regional IB programs.

Exactly. The question is about criteria. I asked Jennie Franklin last winter during one in-person info session: as you are assigning similar program size, how do you set up the qualification criteria? Student stats and number of students who are interested in STEM will be significantly higher than another region (yes, I'm talking about scenarios like Region 4 vs. Region 5, but I don't want to offend anyone). So do you apply different criteria? Or do you use lottery for the former region? Jennie didn't give me an answer. She hasn't thought about this back then. Applying different criteria is what's CES and MS magnet is doing, and you'll end us with very different student body no matter you then run a lottery or not. This student body will be significantly stronger in academics and more suitable for adapting into the current SMCS curriculum where the future STEM program will most likely be successful.

I agree that stats will be different, but interest? I think you'd be surprised.

This is your guess based on your limited personal experience in your friendship circle. Central office did run a survey last spring to ask you select the top program themes that you'll be interested in. They did presented the ranking, but if I recall correctly, it's not breaking down into different regions nor parents/students/educators. The only purpose of the survey is to showcase that hey, people are interested. And then they run full-speed ahead with the agenda in their mind.

But they didn’t say these programs would be the ONLY way for a child to access high level courses. Why can’t we have good quality regular high schools in every building?

I agree with you totally! Why can't every HS provide high level courses? Why do you have to apply and get accepted into a STEM/humanity program in order to access high level courses? If you apply and you have strong stats and strong interests, and lottery kicks you out?

If you are in a W school, Blair or Wheaton you get stem. If you aren't, too bad.

Somewhere there is a list of higher level courses that will be offered at all schools

Yes, but MVC Mom doesn't consider AP Calc BC to be higher level.

Is it equitable that students from more wealthy areas are offered the opportunity to take MVC at their HS if their Mathematics path puts them there while the same school system denies that opportunity to similarly able/prepared/interested students from less wealthy areas?

-- Not MVC Mom

Churchill parent here. As far as I know, Churchill offers MVC while Wootton does not. I would think Wootton tends to have more math-advanced students than Churchill in general. So not all wealthy HSs offer that.

But you bring up a case in point. Churchill. Whitman. What do these schools have in common? The greatest concentrations of wealth and the widest advanced offerings exclusive of those at magnets.

Though there may be counterexamples, any reasonable analysis of the data will show that clear, strong correlation. Why should a public school system not be serving, equivalently, individuals from less wealthy areas as it does those from more wealthy areas? The current paradigm reinforces privilege, accruing disproportionate benefit of public services to those with the most, and the plan MCPS has proffered, as is, will continue that, quite unnecessarily.

Hey I support you 100%. If the cost of dismissal the stellar magnet programs is to standardize advanced STEM course offering in every HS in MCPS, I'd support that. However, we are running on exactly the opposite direction with the current regional program layout...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wootton parent here. They do offer a MVC/DifEQ class but not the advanced SMCS math courses.

Churchill PP here. Sorry then I provided inaccurate statement. Well as the silver lining of the dark cloud, at least Wootton will have those advanced SMCS math courses in the future and would like be able to not lose too many electives as the student body in Region 4 is the strongest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So what do we think the criteria will be? It looks like they are planning on 60 non-local students per grade for the SMCS, IB, and humanities programs. Let's assume another 20 local students for each, so that would be 80 students per grade for each program, or 480 countywide. Out of like 12,000 kids per grade that's like top 4% if you think about each of them individually, but between the overlap of the kids qualifying/interested and the fact that some won't attend, you're probably talking about these programs serving approximately the top 15% of kids or so.

Honestly given that they use 85th percentile for ES and MS magnet lotteries now, I would not be surprised if they just pick that, at least for IB and humanities. Big question would be if it's locally normed like in the lower grades, or purely top 15% of the county.

How many kids per grade are at Blair SMCS, Poolesville SMCS, and RMIB now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Watkins Mill IB can't be a good as RM IB (unless you make RM worse) because the students there are less capable.

Oh, do tell! What makes Watkins Mill students "less capable" in your mind. This should be fascinating.

Not OP, but it's not less capable as in less than, it's less capable in that RM is the top 1% of the county v Watkins Mill takes top 5-10% it's obviously not the same

Think top 1% in wealth, they are billionaires, v top 5-10% are millionaires. There is a difference

My kid graduated from RMIB. There definitely kids at home schools that are as smart as the RMIB kids. BUT the RMIB is a particular program that requires particular interests and motivation. It's a ton of work. So you need a kid that is really smart, but ALSO basically loves being a grind, AND also loves a lot of reading/writing and philosophizing about reading/writing ("theory of the mind" stuff) AND doesn't mind a lot of bureacracy mandated by apparently someone in Switzerland. Can they fill several schools with those kids? I don't think so. It's a rare bird. I don't really know why they are pushing so many of these schools, and I doubt the demand or success rates will be there. I don't think my kid would have left our home school for a program that was basically watered-down because the kids weren't that into it.

This is also exactly the same feeling from Blair and Poolesville SMCS students/parents. A student can only benefit from these programs only when they are extremely self-motivated, have good time management skills, and being the top few percent in terms of aptitude and knowledge breadth and foundation. Every year there are quite some students in the program struggle and suffer and they'd fit better and gain confidence in their home schools. But parents do not feel the same way. They tend to be always too confident (or pushy in another sense) in believing their kids are the best and omnipotent.

All of this points to water-downed programs in the new regional model. And since the plan is half-baked, it won't work for students in struggling schools just as much as it won't work for anyone else, including highly able students.