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:

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.

Aside from the possibility that the PP is a Wooton parent really concerned (and rightly so) about losing access to Blair SMCS (whether or not that, itself, survives at its current level) and the risk of whatever the Wheaton STEM magnet becomes offering a pale shadow in comparison (at least for the first few years), hoping to rope in others with the VAC example, instead (again, not a bad thing, either strategically or ethically; you can provide whatever probability of this fits your mindset :wink, the idea behind suggesting that a family should have to move within a school district to access educational opportunity meeting their children's needs is the most persistent of inequities we have in the county. It also feeds, via the predjudice of low expectation and other factors, the deepest of those inequities, and the one about which central admin and the BOE spend the bulk of their time analyzing, discussing and trying to address, sadly overlooking the possibility of doing the admittedly harder work of addressing both.

PP here. I’ve had kids at both the VAC and Blair SMCS. We live in region 1 anyway, so we’d continue to have access to both programs - we’re not directly affected.

That said, I still think it stinks to give at most 1/6 of kids continued access to a proven, award-winning, countywide magnet while giving everyone else the opportunity to play guinea pig in a new, untested program.

And, I know this board loves STEM, but I think my VAC kid would be less likely to get a workable replacement in the new system. Would my SMCS student have had the same range and selection of college-level STEM courses in the new system? Probably not. But they’d be fine with a variety of AP math & science courses and a few cool electives. I don’t see a less-intensive art equivalent serving the same function for my VAC student.

I guess you missed the part about SMCS not existing anymore.Blairs magnet will be whatever the new STEM thing is.

[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:

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.

Aside from the possibility that the PP is a Wooton parent really concerned (and rightly so) about losing access to Blair SMCS (whether or not that, itself, survives at its current level) and the risk of whatever the Wheaton STEM magnet becomes offering a pale shadow in comparison (at least for the first few years), hoping to rope in others with the VAC example, instead (again, not a bad thing, either strategically or ethically; you can provide whatever probability of this fits your mindset :wink, the idea behind suggesting that a family should have to move within a school district to access educational opportunity meeting their children's needs is the most persistent of inequities we have in the county. It also feeds, via the predjudice of low expectation and other factors, the deepest of those inequities, and the one about which central admin and the BOE spend the bulk of their time analyzing, discussing and trying to address, sadly overlooking the possibility of doing the admittedly harder work of addressing both.

PP here. I’ve had kids at both the VAC and Blair SMCS. We live in region 1 anyway, so we’d continue to have access to both programs - we’re not directly affected.

That said, I still think it stinks to give at most 1/6 of kids continued access to a proven, award-winning, countywide magnet while giving everyone else the opportunity to play guinea pig in a new, untested program.

And, I know this board loves STEM, but I think my VAC kid would be less likely to get a workable replacement in the new system. Would my SMCS student have had the same range and selection of college-level STEM courses in the new system? Probably not. But they’d be fine with a variety of AP math & science courses and a few cool electives. I don’t see a less-intensive art equivalent serving the same function for my VAC student.

I guess you missed the part about SMCS not existing anymore.Blairs magnet will be whatever the new STEM thing is.

No one has said this. Of course they have not guaranteed there will be no changes to SMCS, but the details have not been announced, there is certainly no concrete plan to change SMCS to "whatever the new STEM thing is." If you think I'm wrong, please share an actual source for that, because I have been following this closely and have heard nothing or the sort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ But it’s in the STEM box of that CTE slide, with things like cybersecurity and agricultural. Makeup artist is an awkward fit, at best, with those things.

Yes, as a PP already explained, they're trying to rearrange all of the CTE programs to fit into the five broad categories. Not everything fits perfectly.

It makes much more sense in the entrepreneurship, arts, or healthcare box.

I think I agree with this PP: “That MCPS considers cosmetology STEM is more disturbing than mixing up cosmology with cosmetology.”

PP who brought up this wording concern here. I originally thought it’s a typo, which is laughable, but now I intend to believe it’s not a typo. This is study team’s understanding about STEM, which is much more alarming. Anyway, just want to point out that cosmology is not in SMACS course offering.

-1. STEM learning in fact is a major part of the cosmetology program at Edison:

"Students learn concepts and skills related to anatomy and physiology, mathematics and measurement, and chemistry. It is through course work, lab projects, and clinical experience that students are able to earn the 1,500 clock hours required to become eligible to earn graduation credit and take the Maryland State Board of Cosmetologists Licensing Exam (both the Practical & Theory parts)."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ But it’s in the STEM box of that CTE slide, with things like cybersecurity and agricultural. Makeup artist is an awkward fit, at best, with those things.

Yes, as a PP already explained, they're trying to rearrange all of the CTE programs to fit into the five broad categories. Not everything fits perfectly.

It makes much more sense in the entrepreneurship, arts, or healthcare box.

I think I agree with this PP: “That MCPS considers cosmetology STEM is more disturbing than mixing up cosmology with cosmetology.”

PP who brought up this wording concern here. I originally thought it’s a typo, which is laughable, but now I intend to believe it’s not a typo. This is study team’s understanding about STEM, which is much more alarming. Anyway, just want to point out that cosmology is not in SMACS course offering.

I think it's misguided but not alarming. I think they want to be able to show there are some CTE/non-college-bound options in every bucket, alongside the options for college-bound kids. Yes, cosmetology in the STEM bucket is kind of shoving a square peg into a round hole, but fairly harmlessly IMO. They're not saying they're going to try to have the SMCS teachers teach cosmetology or anything dumb like that. They're saying "how about we have a cosmetology teacher at Blair and we can pretend that and SMCS are kind of related."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ But it’s in the STEM box of that CTE slide, with things like cybersecurity and agricultural. Makeup artist is an awkward fit, at best, with those things.

Yes, as a PP already explained, they're trying to rearrange all of the CTE programs to fit into the five broad categories. Not everything fits perfectly.

It makes much more sense in the entrepreneurship, arts, or healthcare box.

I think I agree with this PP: “That MCPS considers cosmetology STEM is more disturbing than mixing up cosmology with cosmetology.”

PP who brought up this wording concern here. I originally thought it’s a typo, which is laughable, but now I intend to believe it’s not a typo. This is study team’s understanding about STEM, which is much more alarming. Anyway, just want to point out that cosmology is not in SMACS course offering.

-1. STEM learning in fact is a major part of the cosmetology program at Edison:

"Students learn concepts and skills related to anatomy and physiology, mathematics and measurement, and chemistry. It is through course work, lab projects, and clinical experience that students are able to earn the 1,500 clock hours required to become eligible to earn graduation credit and take the Maryland State Board of Cosmetologists Licensing Exam (both the Practical & Theory parts)."

PP here. Huh, interesting. I guess it's a less dumb pairing than I thought. Still, calm down people. No one is going to make your SMCS kids study cosmetology, or make kids who are into cosmetology enroll in SMCS. It's more like the idea of having the same school run programs both for kids who want to graduate with a CNA and kids who want to head to med school or do biomedical research, except more of a stretch because they want to have pairings like that for all the programs.

[Anonymous]

So many idiots posting here think they are savants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Late to this since my kid is graduating but the dismantling of these flagship magnet programs really is a shame. Both Poolesville and Blair are nationally ranked. Just flushing that all down the toilet?

I am all for more regional programs, but they should keep the current ones as well.

They are keeping the current ones. Just changing the boundaries of who can attend them (and probably also making them a bit smaller, for Blair at least.). No one knows how big or small an impact this will have on them, but that doesn't stop some people from being sure they will be "destroyed."

This is absolutely not the case. There is no way the three Poolesville programs will continue at the same school. There is no replication/replacement for Global Ecology in the new proposed regional programs. The current county-wide programs are not distributed equally so there will be regions with no established programs and only new programs, which is not equitable. You have no idea what you're talking about. YES, they are destroying these county-wide programs, especially at Poolesville.

Can we do anything about it this? I’ve been in MCPS long enough to know that they don’t seem to listen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Late to this since my kid is graduating but the dismantling of these flagship magnet programs really is a shame. Both Poolesville and Blair are nationally ranked. Just flushing that all down the toilet?

I am all for more regional programs, but they should keep the current ones as well.

They are keeping the current ones. Just changing the boundaries of who can attend them (and probably also making them a bit smaller, for Blair at least.). No one knows how big or small an impact this will have on them, but that doesn't stop some people from being sure they will be "destroyed."

This is absolutely not the case. There is no way the three Poolesville programs will continue at the same school. There is no replication/replacement for Global Ecology in the new proposed regional programs. The current county-wide programs are not distributed equally so there will be regions with no established programs and only new programs, which is not equitable. You have no idea what you're talking about. YES, they are destroying these county-wide programs, especially at Poolesville.

Can we do anything about it this? I’ve been in MCPS long enough to know that they don’t seem to listen.

Poolesville might be the only place that keeps multiple big magnets/programs, albeit probably a bit smaller in size than now. Otherwise how are they going to fill all that space? There's just not that many kids living that close to Poolesville.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Late to this since my kid is graduating but the dismantling of these flagship magnet programs really is a shame. Both Poolesville and Blair are nationally ranked. Just flushing that all down the toilet?

I am all for more regional programs, but they should keep the current ones as well.

They are keeping the current ones. Just changing the boundaries of who can attend them (and probably also making them a bit smaller, for Blair at least.). No one knows how big or small an impact this will have on them, but that doesn't stop some people from being sure they will be "destroyed."

This is absolutely not the case. There is no way the three Poolesville programs will continue at the same school. There is no replication/replacement for Global Ecology in the new proposed regional programs. The current county-wide programs are not distributed equally so there will be regions with no established programs and only new programs, which is not equitable. You have no idea what you're talking about. YES, they are destroying these county-wide programs, especially at Poolesville.

Can we do anything about it this? I’ve been in MCPS long enough to know that they don’t seem to listen.

Poolesville might be the only place that keeps multiple big magnets/programs, albeit probably a bit smaller in size than now. Otherwise how are they going to fill all that space? There's just not that many kids living that close to Poolesville.

They are making the boundaries at PHS much larger. There won’t be room for all the houses with the expanded boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Late to this since my kid is graduating but the dismantling of these flagship magnet programs really is a shame. Both Poolesville and Blair are nationally ranked. Just flushing that all down the toilet?

I am all for more regional programs, but they should keep the current ones as well.

They are keeping the current ones. Just changing the boundaries of who can attend them (and probably also making them a bit smaller, for Blair at least.). No one knows how big or small an impact this will have on them, but that doesn't stop some people from being sure they will be "destroyed."

This is absolutely not the case. There is no way the three Poolesville programs will continue at the same school. There is no replication/replacement for Global Ecology in the new proposed regional programs. The current county-wide programs are not distributed equally so there will be regions with no established programs and only new programs, which is not equitable. You have no idea what you're talking about. YES, they are destroying these county-wide programs, especially at Poolesville.

Can we do anything about it this? I’ve been in MCPS long enough to know that they don’t seem to listen.

Poolesville might be the only place that keeps multiple big magnets/programs, albeit probably a bit smaller in size than now. Otherwise how are they going to fill all that space? There's just not that many kids living that close to Poolesville.

They are making the boundaries at PHS much larger. There won’t be room for all the houses with the expanded boundaries

With the current boundaries, students zoned for PHS as their home school would only fill the new building to slightly more than 1/3 of its core capacity. Can the expanded boundaries bring in enough students to justify the size of the new building?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Late to this since my kid is graduating but the dismantling of these flagship magnet programs really is a shame. Both Poolesville and Blair are nationally ranked. Just flushing that all down the toilet?

I am all for more regional programs, but they should keep the current ones as well.

They are keeping the current ones. Just changing the boundaries of who can attend them (and probably also making them a bit smaller, for Blair at least.). No one knows how big or small an impact this will have on them, but that doesn't stop some people from being sure they will be "destroyed."

This is absolutely not the case. There is no way the three Poolesville programs will continue at the same school. There is no replication/replacement for Global Ecology in the new proposed regional programs. The current county-wide programs are not distributed equally so there will be regions with no established programs and only new programs, which is not equitable. You have no idea what you're talking about. YES, they are destroying these county-wide programs, especially at Poolesville.

Can we do anything about it this? I’ve been in MCPS long enough to know that they don’t seem to listen.

Poolesville might be the only place that keeps multiple big magnets/programs, albeit probably a bit smaller in size than now. Otherwise how are they going to fill all that space? There's just not that many kids living that close to Poolesville.

They are making the boundaries at PHS much larger. There won’t be room for all the houses with the expanded boundaries

With the current boundaries, students zoned for PHS as their home school would only fill the new building to slightly more than 1/3 of its core capacity. Can the expanded boundaries bring in enough students to justify the size of the new building?

Remember all the new houses being built too. Feel bad for those new incoming families, buying into the reputation of PHS, only for a rude shock.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Late to this since my kid is graduating but the dismantling of these flagship magnet programs really is a shame. Both Poolesville and Blair are nationally ranked. Just flushing that all down the toilet?

I am all for more regional programs, but they should keep the current ones as well.

They are keeping the current ones. Just changing the boundaries of who can attend them (and probably also making them a bit smaller, for Blair at least.). No one knows how big or small an impact this will have on them, but that doesn't stop some people from being sure they will be "destroyed."

This is absolutely not the case. There is no way the three Poolesville programs will continue at the same school. There is no replication/replacement for Global Ecology in the new proposed regional programs. The current county-wide programs are not distributed equally so there will be regions with no established programs and only new programs, which is not equitable. You have no idea what you're talking about. YES, they are destroying these county-wide programs, especially at Poolesville.

Can we do anything about it this? I’ve been in MCPS long enough to know that they don’t seem to listen.

Poolesville might be the only place that keeps multiple big magnets/programs, albeit probably a bit smaller in size than now. Otherwise how are they going to fill all that space? There's just not that many kids living that close to Poolesville.

My guess is that they keep the SMCS and global ecology (probably rebranding global ecology as a different "pathway" in the STEM bucket so they can justify one school having the two programs, but not actually changing it that much) but move humanities somewhere else.

[Anonymous]

Blair's SMCS magnet can't exist in its current form without a 9th period, so the students have 8 classes a semester. This requires extra funding to pay teachers for an extra period, which is a big factor in the limit on the number of students in the program. (The same applies to the Blair CAP magnet, but they are not required to have a 9th period in grades 11-12.)

My older kid is a rising senior in Blair SMCS, and my younger kid is a rising freshman at Blair, but not in the SMCS magnet. The younger one is trying to do as close to a DIY SMCS magnet as he can, but, aside from the accelerated math (4 semesters of Algebra 2 and Precalc being compressed into 3 semesters or 2 for Functions), and the accelerated CS path (which is not done by all SMCS students), he cannot possibly fit the equivalent classes into his schedule because of the lack of a 9th period. That's 4 full extra class periods over the 4 years that the magnet students get that are typically rigorous classes in interesting STEM subjects with a weighted GPA boost.

Unless other schools offer an extra class period, they cannot replicate the SMCS magnet, even aside from the actual course content.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Blair's SMCS magnet can't exist in its current form without a 9th period, so the students have 8 classes a semester. This requires extra funding to pay teachers for an extra period, which is a big factor in the limit on the number of students in the program. (The same applies to the Blair CAP magnet, but they are not required to have a 9th period in grades 11-12.)

My older kid is a rising senior in Blair SMCS, and my younger kid is a rising freshman at Blair, but not in the SMCS magnet. The younger one is trying to do as close to a DIY SMCS magnet as he can, but, aside from the accelerated math (4 semesters of Algebra 2 and Precalc being compressed into 3 semesters or 2 for Functions), and the accelerated CS path (which is not done by all SMCS students), he cannot possibly fit the equivalent classes into his schedule because of the lack of a 9th period. That's 4 full extra class periods over the 4 years that the magnet students get that are typically rigorous classes in interesting STEM subjects with a weighted GPA boost.

Unless other schools offer an extra class period, they cannot replicate the SMCS magnet, even aside from the actual course content.

Thanks for raising up this valid point and sharing your story about a "sensitivity test" your younger one tried. You should be proud of him of his motive to self-pushing to a better stance.

MCPS never said they would try to make the new regional STEM programs a replica of SMACS magnet. For one, they don't understand the SMACS curriculum and don't even want to spend time to try to understand it. For two, they can make a dumbed-down program elsewhere and than using "equity" to force SMACS outing the extra period, if by that time the extra period was not already unnecessary considering the significant dilution of the student's competence level. So you'll end up with killing SMACS. They just never want to admit that but people are not dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Blair's SMCS magnet can't exist in its current form without a 9th period, so the students have 8 classes a semester. This requires extra funding to pay teachers for an extra period, which is a big factor in the limit on the number of students in the program. (The same applies to the Blair CAP magnet, but they are not required to have a 9th period in grades 11-12.)

My older kid is a rising senior in Blair SMCS, and my younger kid is a rising freshman at Blair, but not in the SMCS magnet. The younger one is trying to do as close to a DIY SMCS magnet as he can, but, aside from the accelerated math (4 semesters of Algebra 2 and Precalc being compressed into 3 semesters or 2 for Functions), and the accelerated CS path (which is not done by all SMCS students), he cannot possibly fit the equivalent classes into his schedule because of the lack of a 9th period. That's 4 full extra class periods over the 4 years that the magnet students get that are typically rigorous classes in interesting STEM subjects with a weighted GPA boost.

Unless other schools offer an extra class period, they cannot replicate the SMCS magnet, even aside from the actual course content.

Wait, how does it even work for some students at the same school to have more periods than others? I'm so confused...