Thursday 5/21 Board of Education Meeting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What did we think of the testimonies?

I though some were spot on while others...

Sick of MCPS wasting time- people's livelihoods are at stake.

I was bored by all the BCC testimonials and muted each time one of them appeared. Eventually there were too many and I stopped watching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Board asking for “information” on compacted math is on one hand good that they’re not letting it drop but on the other they could actually do so much more. So frustrating

What information did they ask for?

To me it sounded like (1) the new amplify contract and (2) the current state of compacted math on the ground e.g., where it is not offered, where it is virtual, etc.

I don't know why the BOE doesn't reach out to schools who have moved away from compacted math but still maintained a model that has intentional enrichment and acceleration (with on and off ramps). Yes, it seems like you can do it with something other than a clustered model. Our ES has done it for years with great academic growth and achievement data while closing achievement gaps at high levels. My child is in Algebra this year (Grade7).

Can you share the school?

And the model ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What did we think of the testimonies?

I though some were spot on while others...

Sick of MCPS wasting time- people's livelihoods are at stake.

Which were spot on and which were “wastes of time” in your opinion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did we think of the testimonies?

I though some were spot on while others...

Sick of MCPS wasting time- people's livelihoods are at stake.

Which were spot on and which were “wastes of time” in your opinion?

DP. I agree the testimony I saw seemed like a waste of time since none talked about why the room was packed today. People are fighting for their jobs but they have no voice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did we think of the testimonies?

I though some were spot on while others...

Sick of MCPS wasting time- people's livelihoods are at stake.

I was bored by all the BCC testimonials and muted each time one of them appeared. Eventually there were too many and I stopped watching.[/quote

These are children advocating for themselves. Think before posting please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did we think of the testimonies?

I though some were spot on while others...

Sick of MCPS wasting time- people's livelihoods are at stake.

Which were spot on and which were “wastes of time” in your opinion?

All the students were phenomenal. And Ms. Nora did well too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Board asking for “information” on compacted math is on one hand good that they’re not letting it drop but on the other they could actually do so much more. So frustrating

What information did they ask for?

To me it sounded like (1) the new amplify contract and (2) the current state of compacted math on the ground e.g., where it is not offered, where it is virtual, etc.

I don't know why the BOE doesn't reach out to schools who have moved away from compacted math but still maintained a model that has intentional enrichment and acceleration (with on and off ramps). Yes, it seems like you can do it with something other than a clustered model. Our ES has done it for years with great academic growth and achievement data while closing achievement gaps at high levels. My child is in Algebra this year (Grade7).

Can you share the school?

And the model ?

While I'm not sure I should put the school's name out there, I believe our principal designed the school's math approach a few years ago (based on the presentation at BTSN). He said it was to make sure the students had a solid foundation in math but understood that students have different math needs. There were different math classes so when my DD was in 5+ she was taught 5th and 6th grade standards, However, it was different than CM, but I can't remember the specifics. I do remember him sharing the MS data for CM students (not great) and saying why our school is approaching the enrichment and acceleration differently. Based on our school's data and my DD's access to math classes in MS, it seems to be working for all students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Montoya has her flaws, but I’m super glad she mentioned all the unpopular things MCPS is doing and how it’s affecting enrollment.

She’s also the only one that seems to understand board members have a role in this and can break the cycle by intervening where needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya has her flaws, but I’m super glad she mentioned all the unpopular things MCPS is doing and how it’s affecting enrollment.

She’s also the only one that seems to understand board members have a role in this and can break the cycle by intervening where needed.

Some people said on this board said she has a kid in compacted math. She has skin in the game, and can see how frustrating some MCPS decisions are first hand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya has her flaws, but I’m super glad she mentioned all the unpopular things MCPS is doing and how it’s affecting enrollment.

She’s also the only one that seems to understand board members have a role in this and can break the cycle by intervening where needed.

Some people said on this board said she has a kid in compacted math. She has skin in the game, and can see how frustrating some MCPS decisions are first hand.

She voted to destroy high school magnets. I wonder if her kid was in HS at the time of the vote, what would have been her vote? Do board members care only about their kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya has her flaws, but I’m super glad she mentioned all the unpopular things MCPS is doing and how it’s affecting enrollment.

She’s also the only one that seems to understand board members have a role in this and can break the cycle by intervening where needed.

Some people said on this board said she has a kid in compacted math. She has skin in the game, and can see how frustrating some MCPS decisions are first hand.

She voted to destroy high school magnets. I wonder if her kid was in HS at the time of the vote, what would have been her vote? Do board members care only about their kids?

In some ways it's not wrong. Where you have to very first advocate for yourself and your family. If you don't like how things are, then being willing to step up the plate and run for the BOE.

But if I recall correctly, Montoya's kids would currently go to BCC, which should be a decent school. And maybe they're not magnet material. So she has no interest or care about the current magnet programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya has her flaws, but I’m super glad she mentioned all the unpopular things MCPS is doing and how it’s affecting enrollment.

She’s also the only one that seems to understand board members have a role in this and can break the cycle by intervening where needed.

Some people said on this board said she has a kid in compacted math. She has skin in the game, and can see how frustrating some MCPS decisions are first hand.

She voted to destroy high school magnets. I wonder if her kid was in HS at the time of the vote, what would have been her vote? Do board members care only about their kids?

If her kids are at some schools, its not really a big deal as they will have the opportunities. The bigger issue is the DCC and NEC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya has her flaws, but I’m super glad she mentioned all the unpopular things MCPS is doing and how it’s affecting enrollment.

She’s also the only one that seems to understand board members have a role in this and can break the cycle by intervening where needed.

Some people said on this board said she has a kid in compacted math. She has skin in the game, and can see how frustrating some MCPS decisions are first hand.

She voted to destroy high school magnets. I wonder if her kid was in HS at the time of the vote, what would have been her vote? Do board members care only about their kids?

In some ways it's not wrong. Where you have to very first advocate for yourself and your family. If you don't like how things are, then being willing to step up the plate and run for the BOE.

But if I recall correctly, Montoya's kids would currently go to BCC, which should be a decent school. And maybe they're not magnet material. So she has no interest or care about the current magnet programs.

Many of the Board members care only about certain groups. Natalie, Grace and Brenda come to mind. I think Montoya is just not at the stage yet to have understood all the high school program implications, and was misled by MCPS folks into thinking the plan will expand access and be more equitable. Just as if she only had a kindergartner she would not be at the stage yet to fully grasp what compacted math involves, and would take what MCPS staff say at face value without the necessary skepticism to get real info and clarity.

I really appreciated her points yesterday that this is an unacceptable pattern that staff provide their materials to board members and the public way too late, and that there is a history of presenting ideas to be voted on without reasons, data, fleshed out plans, costs, etc. There always seems to be a shadow agenda. This is what everyone means when we say MCPS is not transparent and why there continues to be a lack of trust.

Also, Rita is right that Grace is rude and short with her and respects other folks more. It is visibly uncomfortable watching Grace habitually cut off Rita and lets everyone else speak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montoya has her flaws, but I’m super glad she mentioned all the unpopular things MCPS is doing and how it’s affecting enrollment.

She’s also the only one that seems to understand board members have a role in this and can break the cycle by intervening where needed.

Some people said on this board said she has a kid in compacted math. She has skin in the game, and can see how frustrating some MCPS decisions are first hand.

She voted to destroy high school magnets. I wonder if her kid was in HS at the time of the vote, what would have been her vote? Do board members care only about their kids?

If her kids are at some schools, its not really a big deal as they will have the opportunities. The bigger issue is the DCC and NEC.

+1 And some of us don't think the changes to the magnets are bad. It's bad for the 100 ultra-talented kids who won't get their gold-plated STEM opportunities in quite the same way at Blair, but it's better for many other kids are also smart but whose schools had no advanced offerings.

[Anonymous]

The Open Lunch policy discussion was absolutely insane.

Karla, Rita, Laura and Julie all agreeing that the policy needed to be revised and that they should have data and a discussion before voting to rescind was logical.

But Brenda, Grace and Natalie instead doubling down on voting to rescind the policy, gathering public comments, and then deciding once again whether to proceed with the rescission of the policy was absolutely bonkers.

And then, Brenda taking her ball and going home because there weren't enough votes to rescind the policy and declining to revise the policy was just sour grapes.

So we bum rushed a change for no reason and now the outdated, vague Open Lunch policy gets to stand indefinitely because Brenda didn't have her way.

The BOE is a joke.