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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I might have the wrong type or unpopular type of view of these things.

But our kids didn't get into the GT or magnet programs. There were a couple of years where they made it to the lottery but didn't get selected. The same with some of their classmates and our neighbors.

Personally for our family we were okay with it.

The GT, IB and magnet programs are supposed to be for the academically elite, where only the top get in. We were perfectly fine with our kids not making it and going to our local school and is one of the reasons why we chose to live where we do.

As others are trying to say, if you increase the number and seats of the programs, it dilutes the programs and isn't as rigorous or advanced like how the programs are now. Which people are saying they are okay with because it suits the needs of the many instead of the very few.

But another way of looking at it, is that maybe MCPS should be focusing on improving the instruction and quality at their individual schools. So those students who don't get in to the county wide programs (either by not quite qualifying or just not get selected by the lottery) will still get the class selection and level that that they need. Instead of having some mediocre programs that might not be better than some of the local schools around here. And the issue with the offering of the potentially mediocre is that it sounds like they're going to change the current countywide program which is considered top tier.

I had to stop myself from posting in this thread:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1287572.page

Because know that people will attack me as entitled. But I think there's something very wrong if a school doesn't have a track for students to take Algebra I by seventh grade and they have to look to going to a different school just to get on that track. But that just goes to show how there are different standards at different schools within the county and this is starting at elementary school. By the time students get to high school and eligible for these magnet/regional programs, students from different schools won't be on the same level based on the math tracks offered by their elementary schools.

What school doesn't have a track for kids to take Algebra I by 7th grade?

[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:Pushback on the viability of recreating magnet programs on regional basis:

https://bethesdamagazine.com/2025/08/13/mcps-program-changes-concerns/

Good, and we need a lot more of this. It was strategic that they introduced this proposal during the summer, when fewer parents and teachers are paying attention. They sought no input, and they thought they could build momentum for it before there the pushback.

The best comment is the final line: “Because we can have all these wonderful regions … but if we still have a disparity in the outcomes, are we really putting the equity lens on that?” This is what I keep coming back to regarding the proposal: what does it actually fix? What's the point of destroying these great programs? There's no logic or rationale to it.

They are not destroying the programs. They are expanding access to the programs for the great many who are able to handle the rigor but did not have application luck.

They ARE dismantling the magnet programs. There are insufficient teachers who can teach advanced programs. From the article: Taylor said the district’s recommendation includes areas of certification the district offers, but he doesn’t know if there’s interest from faculty to “dive in and hyper-specialize.”

He doesn't know. That means he is making decisions with insufficient information. You can't expand programs without trained, hyper-specialized teachers for those programs.

The actual number of highly able students are insufficient to form regional magnets. We aren't provided information on these numbers because it likely would show that the number of highly able students cab't support rigorous magnets in all regions.

+1 The regional IB programs IBDP pass rate is much lower than RMIB's. That tells you that even the 4 regional programs they created a few years ago aren't as successful. Those programs don't offer some of the HL classes that RMIB does. Why? Because there is not enough interest and probably the teachers don't want to teach it/aren't certified to teach it.

And now MCPS wants to expand it to 6 regionals? Makes zero sense to do that.

Why would Taylor want to break something that is highly successful? I listen to staff, and it seems like they have already made up their minds, but don't really have the data to back up their actions. getting rid of the magnet programming will have negative consequences for the school district.

Who says it's highly successful? A few parents who don't want to change? I don't see it--there's just a few school clusters benefitting from the most selective programs (which points to the issue that the programs are too far away or too inaccessible for some parts of the county).

Any programs that produces more NMSF winners than all other county high schools COMBINED, I would consider them highly successful.

Unfortunately, no program in the county does that.

Shows how little you know about magnets

Actually, it shows that I know more about the magnets than you do.
No program in the county produces more NMSFS than all the other county schools combined. None

appears magnet programs collectively produced 87 (blair, RM, and PHS) out of 140 total for mcps. that's pretty special if you ask me

That's collectively, not single program.

Genius.

That was the claim, idiot

Oh nice. The magnet program does produce more NMSF than all other high schools combined. It’s a factually correct statement. Use your common sense. Dimwit.

Nope, not even close.

2025: Blair 42, all other MCPS high schools 98: https://www.mymcmedia.org/158-county-students-named-national-merit-semifinalists/
2024: Blair 41, all other MCPS high schools 121 https://www.mymcmedia.org/186-county-students-named-national-merit-semifinalists/
2023:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I might have the wrong type or unpopular type of view of these things.

But our kids didn't get into the GT or magnet programs. There were a couple of years where they made it to the lottery but didn't get selected. The same with some of their classmates and our neighbors.

Personally for our family we were okay with it.

The GT, IB and magnet programs are supposed to be for the academically elite, where only the top get in. We were perfectly fine with our kids not making it and going to our local school and is one of the reasons why we chose to live where we do.

As others are trying to say, if you increase the number and seats of the programs, it dilutes the programs and isn't as rigorous or advanced like how the programs are now. Which people are saying they are okay with because it suits the needs of the many instead of the very few.

But another way of looking at it, is that maybe MCPS should be focusing on improving the instruction and quality at their individual schools. So those students who don't get in to the county wide programs (either by not quite qualifying or just not get selected by the lottery) will still get the class selection and level that that they need. Instead of having some mediocre programs that might not be better than some of the local schools around here. And the issue with the offering of the potentially mediocre is that it sounds like they're going to change the current countywide program which is considered top tier.

I had to stop myself from posting in this thread:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1287572.page

Because know that people will attack me as entitled. But I think there's something very wrong if a school doesn't have a track for students to take Algebra I by seventh grade and they have to look to going to a different school just to get on that track. But that just goes to show how there are different standards at different schools within the county and this is starting at elementary school. By the time students get to high school and eligible for these magnet/regional programs, students from different schools won't be on the same level based on the math tracks offered by their elementary schools.

What school doesn't have a track for kids to take Algebra I by 7th grade?

Nevermind what I said about that. I just reread that original posters post and realized that both options will have their rising 5th graders in Algebra by grade 7. I originally read it as the only way they could take Algebra I by 7th grade is by taking that math course at the local middle school.

But posting now (I didn't want to bombard this thread with random thoughts that popped into mind) gives me an opportunity to mention that there are also Innovative Schools, which are the yearround schools at MCPS.

So that's at least three things where MCPS spends extra money on and doesn't make available to all schools and groups:

Innovative Schools-the yearround schools. I guess this year it's only Arcola ES: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/dtecps/title1/schools-innovative-school-calendar/

Title I-federal funds

Focus Schools-local funds

And I'm sure there are a lot more programs and initiatives.

So diverting/allocating funds to more high need schools/areas is nothing new and what should be done.

But again it shouldn't be done by lowering the ceiling or opportunities for others. As much as I understand the best way to improve the county is to raise baseline of education that everyone has, I'm not magnanimous enough to take one for the team at the cost of my kid's growth and development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I might have the wrong type or unpopular type of view of these things.

But our kids didn't get into the GT or magnet programs. There were a couple of years where they made it to the lottery but didn't get selected. The same with some of their classmates and our neighbors.

Personally for our family we were okay with it.

The GT, IB and magnet programs are supposed to be for the academically elite, where only the top get in. We were perfectly fine with our kids not making it and going to our local school and is one of the reasons why we chose to live where we do.

As others are trying to say, if you increase the number and seats of the programs, it dilutes the programs and isn't as rigorous or advanced like how the programs are now. Which people are saying they are okay with because it suits the needs of the many instead of the very few.

But another way of looking at it, is that maybe MCPS should be focusing on improving the instruction and quality at their individual schools. So those students who don't get in to the county wide programs (either by not quite qualifying or just not get selected by the lottery) will still get the class selection and level that that they need. Instead of having some mediocre programs that might not be better than some of the local schools around here. And the issue with the offering of the potentially mediocre is that it sounds like they're going to change the current countywide program which is considered top tier.

I had to stop myself from posting in this thread:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1287572.page

Because know that people will attack me as entitled. But I think there's something very wrong if a school doesn't have a track for students to take Algebra I by seventh grade and they have to look to going to a different school just to get on that track. But that just goes to show how there are different standards at different schools within the county and this is starting at elementary school. By the time students get to high school and eligible for these magnet/regional programs, students from different schools won't be on the same level based on the math tracks offered by their elementary schools.

What school doesn't have a track for kids to take Algebra I by 7th grade?

Nevermind what I said about that. I just reread that original posters post and realized that both options will have their rising 5th graders in Algebra by grade 7. I originally read it as the only way they could take Algebra I by 7th grade is by taking that math course at the local middle school.

But posting now (I didn't want to bombard this thread with random thoughts that popped into mind) gives me an opportunity to mention that there are also Innovative Schools, which are the yearround schools at MCPS.

So that's at least three things where MCPS spends extra money on and doesn't make available to all schools and groups:

Innovative Schools-the yearround schools. I guess this year it's only Arcola ES: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/dtecps/title1/schools-innovative-school-calendar/

Title I-federal funds

Focus Schools-local funds

And I'm sure there are a lot more programs and initiatives.

So diverting/allocating funds to more high need schools/areas is nothing new and what should be done.

But again it shouldn't be done by lowering the ceiling or opportunities for others. As much as I understand the best way to improve the county is to raise baseline of education that everyone has, I'm not magnanimous enough to take one for the team at the cost of my kid's growth and development.

So...others should be magnanimous enough not to use their franchise to allocate spending of the common wealth on a basis commensurate with individual ability/academic need, such that that need would be met reasonably equivalently across the system, so that your DC can get what you expect from living in a community of relative wealth. Got it

[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:Pushback on the viability of recreating magnet programs on regional basis:

https://bethesdamagazine.com/2025/08/13/mcps-program-changes-concerns/

Good, and we need a lot more of this. It was strategic that they introduced this proposal during the summer, when fewer parents and teachers are paying attention. They sought no input, and they thought they could build momentum for it before there the pushback.

The best comment is the final line: “Because we can have all these wonderful regions … but if we still have a disparity in the outcomes, are we really putting the equity lens on that?” This is what I keep coming back to regarding the proposal: what does it actually fix? What's the point of destroying these great programs? There's no logic or rationale to it.

They are not destroying the programs. They are expanding access to the programs for the great many who are able to handle the rigor but did not have application luck.

They ARE dismantling the magnet programs. There are insufficient teachers who can teach advanced programs. From the article: Taylor said the district’s recommendation includes areas of certification the district offers, but he doesn’t know if there’s interest from faculty to “dive in and hyper-specialize.”

He doesn't know. That means he is making decisions with insufficient information. You can't expand programs without trained, hyper-specialized teachers for those programs.

The actual number of highly able students are insufficient to form regional magnets. We aren't provided information on these numbers because it likely would show that the number of highly able students cab't support rigorous magnets in all regions.

+1 The regional IB programs IBDP pass rate is much lower than RMIB's. That tells you that even the 4 regional programs they created a few years ago aren't as successful. Those programs don't offer some of the HL classes that RMIB does. Why? Because there is not enough interest and probably the teachers don't want to teach it/aren't certified to teach it.

And now MCPS wants to expand it to 6 regionals? Makes zero sense to do that.

Why would Taylor want to break something that is highly successful? I listen to staff, and it seems like they have already made up their minds, but don't really have the data to back up their actions. getting rid of the magnet programming will have negative consequences for the school district.

Who says it's highly successful? A few parents who don't want to change? I don't see it--there's just a few school clusters benefitting from the most selective programs (which points to the issue that the programs are too far away or too inaccessible for some parts of the county).

Any programs that produces more NMSF winners than all other county high schools COMBINED, I would consider them highly successful.

Unfortunately, no program in the county does that.

Shows how little you know about magnets

Actually, it shows that I know more about the magnets than you do.
No program in the county produces more NMSFS than all the other county schools combined. None

appears magnet programs collectively produced 87 (blair, RM, and PHS) out of 140 total for mcps. that's pretty special if you ask me

That's collectively, not single program.

Genius.

That was the claim, idiot

Oh nice. The magnet program does produce more NMSF than all other high schools combined. It’s a factually correct statement. Use your common sense. Dimwit.

Nope, not even close.

2025: Blair 42, all other MCPS high schools 98: https://www.mymcmedia.org/158-county-students-named-national-merit-semifinalists/
2024: Blair 41, all other MCPS high schools 121 https://www.mymcmedia.org/186-county-students-named-national-merit-semifinalists/
2023:

I mean it's 100 f' kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I might have the wrong type or unpopular type of view of these things.

But our kids didn't get into the GT or magnet programs. There were a couple of years where they made it to the lottery but didn't get selected. The same with some of their classmates and our neighbors.

Personally for our family we were okay with it.

The GT, IB and magnet programs are supposed to be for the academically elite, where only the top get in. We were perfectly fine with our kids not making it and going to our local school and is one of the reasons why we chose to live where we do.

As others are trying to say, if you increase the number and seats of the programs, it dilutes the programs and isn't as rigorous or advanced like how the programs are now. Which people are saying they are okay with because it suits the needs of the many instead of the very few.

But another way of looking at it, is that maybe MCPS should be focusing on improving the instruction and quality at their individual schools. So those students who don't get in to the county wide programs (either by not quite qualifying or just not get selected by the lottery) will still get the class selection and level that that they need. Instead of having some mediocre programs that might not be better than some of the local schools around here. And the issue with the offering of the potentially mediocre is that it sounds like they're going to change the current countywide program which is considered top tier.

I had to stop myself from posting in this thread:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1287572.page

Because know that people will attack me as entitled. But I think there's something very wrong if a school doesn't have a track for students to take Algebra I by seventh grade and they have to look to going to a different school just to get on that track. But that just goes to show how there are different standards at different schools within the county and this is starting at elementary school. By the time students get to high school and eligible for these magnet/regional programs, students from different schools won't be on the same level based on the math tracks offered by their elementary schools.

What school doesn't have a track for kids to take Algebra I by 7th grade?

Every school has an algebra in 7th, I think, its just algebra in 6th, most don't. The bigger issue is the kid swho don't get into magnets and the schools stop at Calc BC leaving kids without enough math to graduate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I might have the wrong type or unpopular type of view of these things.

But our kids didn't get into the GT or magnet programs. There were a couple of years where they made it to the lottery but didn't get selected. The same with some of their classmates and our neighbors.

Personally for our family we were okay with it.

The GT, IB and magnet programs are supposed to be for the academically elite, where only the top get in. We were perfectly fine with our kids not making it and going to our local school and is one of the reasons why we chose to live where we do.

As others are trying to say, if you increase the number and seats of the programs, it dilutes the programs and isn't as rigorous or advanced like how the programs are now. Which people are saying they are okay with because it suits the needs of the many instead of the very few.

But another way of looking at it, is that maybe MCPS should be focusing on improving the instruction and quality at their individual schools. So those students who don't get in to the county wide programs (either by not quite qualifying or just not get selected by the lottery) will still get the class selection and level that that they need. Instead of having some mediocre programs that might not be better than some of the local schools around here. And the issue with the offering of the potentially mediocre is that it sounds like they're going to change the current countywide program which is considered top tier.

I had to stop myself from posting in this thread:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1287572.page

Because know that people will attack me as entitled. But I think there's something very wrong if a school doesn't have a track for students to take Algebra I by seventh grade and they have to look to going to a different school just to get on that track. But that just goes to show how there are different standards at different schools within the county and this is starting at elementary school. By the time students get to high school and eligible for these magnet/regional programs, students from different schools won't be on the same level based on the math tracks offered by their elementary schools.

What school doesn't have a track for kids to take Algebra I by 7th grade?

Nevermind what I said about that. I just reread that original posters post and realized that both options will have their rising 5th graders in Algebra by grade 7. I originally read it as the only way they could take Algebra I by 7th grade is by taking that math course at the local middle school.

But posting now (I didn't want to bombard this thread with random thoughts that popped into mind) gives me an opportunity to mention that there are also Innovative Schools, which are the yearround schools at MCPS.

So that's at least three things where MCPS spends extra money on and doesn't make available to all schools and groups:

Innovative Schools-the yearround schools. I guess this year it's only Arcola ES: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/dtecps/title1/schools-innovative-school-calendar/

Title I-federal funds

Focus Schools-local funds

And I'm sure there are a lot more programs and initiatives.

So diverting/allocating funds to more high need schools/areas is nothing new and what should be done.

But again it shouldn't be done by lowering the ceiling or opportunities for others. As much as I understand the best way to improve the county is to raise baseline of education that everyone has, I'm not magnanimous enough to take one for the team at the cost of my kid's growth and development.

There were two year round schools. Arcola wanted to keep it the other didn't and testified to the BOE. BOE was looking to make cuts to pretend they were doing something so they cut that program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I might have the wrong type or unpopular type of view of these things.

But our kids didn't get into the GT or magnet programs. There were a couple of years where they made it to the lottery but didn't get selected. The same with some of their classmates and our neighbors.

Personally for our family we were okay with it.

The GT, IB and magnet programs are supposed to be for the academically elite, where only the top get in. We were perfectly fine with our kids not making it and going to our local school and is one of the reasons why we chose to live where we do.

As others are trying to say, if you increase the number and seats of the programs, it dilutes the programs and isn't as rigorous or advanced like how the programs are now. Which people are saying they are okay with because it suits the needs of the many instead of the very few.

But another way of looking at it, is that maybe MCPS should be focusing on improving the instruction and quality at their individual schools. So those students who don't get in to the county wide programs (either by not quite qualifying or just not get selected by the lottery) will still get the class selection and level that that they need. Instead of having some mediocre programs that might not be better than some of the local schools around here. And the issue with the offering of the potentially mediocre is that it sounds like they're going to change the current countywide program which is considered top tier.

I had to stop myself from posting in this thread:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1287572.page

Because know that people will attack me as entitled. But I think there's something very wrong if a school doesn't have a track for students to take Algebra I by seventh grade and they have to look to going to a different school just to get on that track. But that just goes to show how there are different standards at different schools within the county and this is starting at elementary school. By the time students get to high school and eligible for these magnet/regional programs, students from different schools won't be on the same level based on the math tracks offered by their elementary schools.

Well noted.

Are you willing to fund other schools differentially enough for them to provide that level of education to their population in need of greater rigor, given that that might require smaller classes than in your area? Are you willing to fund much better ability identification, so that the needs of kids with potential are addressed via public mechanisms where family-based prep currently dominates?

This likely would mean higher taxes or less funding for your area, presuming the area you chose is as you describe because of the relatively high wealth/academic support available from families.

I'm all for provide resources and funding to help raise up disadvantaged and at risk student groups and they absolutely should.

BUT I am not willing to pay higher taxes if I do not see that I'm getting the value from it or even worse less than before. ie how MCPS appears to be lowering the standards for everyone and trying to take away advanced tracks.

Part of the issue with what MCPS is doing, as others have been posting, is that MCPS is lowering the bar rather than trying to bring the groups up to it.

It should not cost extra money to bring higher level classes to all schools.

How do you expect that to be the case? Where there is relative homogeneity of academic ability, there is less need for differentiation/cohorting, while more heterogeneous-ability populations require more, which is more logistically challenging, then requiring more funding to deliver.

This can be so whether that heterogeniety distributes more across the high end or the low end, though typically addressing differential needs of those with significant barriers -- intellectual, emotional, physical, linguistic, etc. -- is more costly than addressing those of students whose differential needs can be met with greater breadth/depth/rigor/pace. Moreover, schools addressing a higher proportion of the former (barriers), though they may receive some differential funding, do not receive enough to address the challenge in full, and then typically are faced both with that and with smaller, less logistically manageable (more costly) cohorts of those with high-end need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I might have the wrong type or unpopular type of view of these things.

But our kids didn't get into the GT or magnet programs. There were a couple of years where they made it to the lottery but didn't get selected. The same with some of their classmates and our neighbors.

Personally for our family we were okay with it.

The GT, IB and magnet programs are supposed to be for the academically elite, where only the top get in. We were perfectly fine with our kids not making it and going to our local school and is one of the reasons why we chose to live where we do.

As others are trying to say, if you increase the number and seats of the programs, it dilutes the programs and isn't as rigorous or advanced like how the programs are now. Which people are saying they are okay with because it suits the needs of the many instead of the very few.

But another way of looking at it, is that maybe MCPS should be focusing on improving the instruction and quality at their individual schools. So those students who don't get in to the county wide programs (either by not quite qualifying or just not get selected by the lottery) will still get the class selection and level that that they need. Instead of having some mediocre programs that might not be better than some of the local schools around here. And the issue with the offering of the potentially mediocre is that it sounds like they're going to change the current countywide program which is considered top tier.

I had to stop myself from posting in this thread:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1287572.page

Because know that people will attack me as entitled. But I think there's something very wrong if a school doesn't have a track for students to take Algebra I by seventh grade and they have to look to going to a different school just to get on that track. But that just goes to show how there are different standards at different schools within the county and this is starting at elementary school. By the time students get to high school and eligible for these magnet/regional programs, students from different schools won't be on the same level based on the math tracks offered by their elementary schools.

What school doesn't have a track for kids to take Algebra I by 7th grade?

Every school has an algebra in 7th, I think, it's just algebra in 6th, most don't. The bigger issue is the kid swho don't get into magnets and the schools stop at Calc BC leaving kids without enough math to graduate.

Most kids who take BC Calc can also take AP Stats if their HS doesn't offer higher than BC Calc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I might have the wrong type or unpopular type of view of these things.

But our kids didn't get into the GT or magnet programs. There were a couple of years where they made it to the lottery but didn't get selected. The same with some of their classmates and our neighbors.

Personally for our family we were okay with it.

The GT, IB and magnet programs are supposed to be for the academically elite, where only the top get in. We were perfectly fine with our kids not making it and going to our local school and is one of the reasons why we chose to live where we do.

As others are trying to say, if you increase the number and seats of the programs, it dilutes the programs and isn't as rigorous or advanced like how the programs are now. Which people are saying they are okay with because it suits the needs of the many instead of the very few.

But another way of looking at it, is that maybe MCPS should be focusing on improving the instruction and quality at their individual schools. So those students who don't get in to the county wide programs (either by not quite qualifying or just not get selected by the lottery) will still get the class selection and level that that they need. Instead of having some mediocre programs that might not be better than some of the local schools around here. And the issue with the offering of the potentially mediocre is that it sounds like they're going to change the current countywide program which is considered top tier.

I had to stop myself from posting in this thread:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1287572.page

Because know that people will attack me as entitled. But I think there's something very wrong if a school doesn't have a track for students to take Algebra I by seventh grade and they have to look to going to a different school just to get on that track. But that just goes to show how there are different standards at different schools within the county and this is starting at elementary school. By the time students get to high school and eligible for these magnet/regional programs, students from different schools won't be on the same level based on the math tracks offered by their elementary schools.

What school doesn't have a track for kids to take Algebra I by 7th grade?

Nevermind what I said about that. I just reread that original posters post and realized that both options will have their rising 5th graders in Algebra by grade 7. I originally read it as the only way they could take Algebra I by 7th grade is by taking that math course at the local middle school.

But posting now (I didn't want to bombard this thread with random thoughts that popped into mind) gives me an opportunity to mention that there are also Innovative Schools, which are the yearround schools at MCPS.

So that's at least three things where MCPS spends extra money on and doesn't make available to all schools and groups:

Innovative Schools-the yearround schools. I guess this year it's only Arcola ES: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/dtecps/title1/schools-innovative-school-calendar/

Title I-federal funds

Focus Schools-local funds

And I'm sure there are a lot more programs and initiatives.

So diverting/allocating funds to more high need schools/areas is nothing new and what should be done.

But again it shouldn't be done by lowering the ceiling or opportunities for others. As much as I understand the best way to improve the county is to raise baseline of education that everyone has, I'm not magnanimous enough to take one for the team at the cost of my kid's growth and development.

So...others should be magnanimous enough not to use their franchise to allocate spending of the common wealth on a basis commensurate with individual ability/academic need, such that that need would be met reasonably equivalently across the system, so that your DC can get what you expect from living in a community of relative wealth. Got it

Yeah. Pretty much. Sorry I'm selfish like that. But I have my standards and expectations.

Like I said, I'm all for helping the disenfranchised, high risk and underserved communities.

But if I don't see the value in what I'm getting, I don't really have any strong connection or affinity to Montgomery County or MCPS to want to stick around or try to help it improve.

What does Montgomery County have that the other local counties don't? It's not jobs because most people we know commute to DC or Virginia for jobs. It WAS schools. But honestly did MCPS really ever do much for their underserved population? There were those times where various schools and the superintendent were caught encouraging schools to not test their lower performing students so they wouldn't bring down the numbers. In some circles, MCPS has a reputation of only caring about the numbers and the people there have no clue on what's going on.

Some other school systems have special programs where they try to celebrate Black/African American excellence. And piloting programs where they encourage parent involvement at schools by having them come in once a month throughout the school year. I'm not saying MCPS isn't doing that. I might just not be aware. But I see MCPS running around trying to propose things that doesn't really address the issues and even worse taking away the good aspects of MCPS. The countywide GT, magnet and IB programs were some things that MCPS had that other school systems didn't and was a factor for us living here.

So going back to what previous poster asked, am I okay if MCPS devotes more funds and resources to the underserved schools compared to other schools? Yes, they definitely should. But as mentioned, if they're going to make a big difference in allocations, then communities should be able to contribute and donate to schools.

Then the previous poster also asked if I'd be okay if it led to higher taxes. For that point it'd depend. To a certain extent, higher taxes is just what's expected and a part of life. But to have higher taxes AND taking away services and opportunities for growth? That's where I'd need to reconsider if it's really worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I might have the wrong type or unpopular type of view of these things.

But our kids didn't get into the GT or magnet programs. There were a couple of years where they made it to the lottery but didn't get selected. The same with some of their classmates and our neighbors.

Personally for our family we were okay with it.

The GT, IB and magnet programs are supposed to be for the academically elite, where only the top get in. We were perfectly fine with our kids not making it and going to our local school and is one of the reasons why we chose to live where we do.

As others are trying to say, if you increase the number and seats of the programs, it dilutes the programs and isn't as rigorous or advanced like how the programs are now. Which people are saying they are okay with because it suits the needs of the many instead of the very few.

But another way of looking at it, is that maybe MCPS should be focusing on improving the instruction and quality at their individual schools. So those students who don't get in to the county wide programs (either by not quite qualifying or just not get selected by the lottery) will still get the class selection and level that that they need. Instead of having some mediocre programs that might not be better than some of the local schools around here. And the issue with the offering of the potentially mediocre is that it sounds like they're going to change the current countywide program which is considered top tier.

I had to stop myself from posting in this thread:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1287572.page

Because know that people will attack me as entitled. But I think there's something very wrong if a school doesn't have a track for students to take Algebra I by seventh grade and they have to look to going to a different school just to get on that track. But that just goes to show how there are different standards at different schools within the county and this is starting at elementary school. By the time students get to high school and eligible for these magnet/regional programs, students from different schools won't be on the same level based on the math tracks offered by their elementary schools.

Well noted.

Are you willing to fund other schools differentially enough for them to provide that level of education to their population in need of greater rigor, given that that might require smaller classes than in your area? Are you willing to fund much better ability identification, so that the needs of kids with potential are addressed via public mechanisms where family-based prep currently dominates?

This likely would mean higher taxes or less funding for your area, presuming the area you chose is as you describe because of the relatively high wealth/academic support available from families.

I'm all for provide resources and funding to help raise up disadvantaged and at risk student groups and they absolutely should.

BUT I am not willing to pay higher taxes if I do not see that I'm getting the value from it or even worse less than before. ie how MCPS appears to be lowering the standards for everyone and trying to take away advanced tracks.

Part of the issue with what MCPS is doing, as others have been posting, is that MCPS is lowering the bar rather than trying to bring the groups up to it.

It should not cost extra money to bring higher level classes to all schools.

How do you expect that to be the case? Where there is relative homogeneity of academic ability, there is less need for differentiation/cohorting, while more heterogeneous-ability populations require more, which is more logistically challenging, then requiring more funding to deliver.

This can be so whether that heterogeniety distributes more across the high end or the low end, though typically addressing differential needs of those with significant barriers -- intellectual, emotional, physical, linguistic, etc. -- is more costly than addressing those of students whose differential needs can be met with greater breadth/depth/rigor/pace. Moreover, schools addressing a higher proportion of the former (barriers), though they may receive some differential funding, do not receive enough to address the challenge in full, and then typically are faced both with that and with smaller, less logistically manageable (more costly) cohorts of those with high-end need.

You just change up a few classes and if you do more smarter kids will stay.

[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:Pushback on the viability of recreating magnet programs on regional basis:

https://bethesdamagazine.com/2025/08/13/mcps-program-changes-concerns/

Good, and we need a lot more of this. It was strategic that they introduced this proposal during the summer, when fewer parents and teachers are paying attention. They sought no input, and they thought they could build momentum for it before there the pushback.

The best comment is the final line: “Because we can have all these wonderful regions … but if we still have a disparity in the outcomes, are we really putting the equity lens on that?” This is what I keep coming back to regarding the proposal: what does it actually fix? What's the point of destroying these great programs? There's no logic or rationale to it.

They are not destroying the programs. They are expanding access to the programs for the great many who are able to handle the rigor but did not have application luck.

They ARE dismantling the magnet programs. There are insufficient teachers who can teach advanced programs. From the article: Taylor said the district’s recommendation includes areas of certification the district offers, but he doesn’t know if there’s interest from faculty to “dive in and hyper-specialize.”

He doesn't know. That means he is making decisions with insufficient information. You can't expand programs without trained, hyper-specialized teachers for those programs.

The actual number of highly able students are insufficient to form regional magnets. We aren't provided information on these numbers because it likely would show that the number of highly able students cab't support rigorous magnets in all regions.

+1 The regional IB programs IBDP pass rate is much lower than RMIB's. That tells you that even the 4 regional programs they created a few years ago aren't as successful. Those programs don't offer some of the HL classes that RMIB does. Why? Because there is not enough interest and probably the teachers don't want to teach it/aren't certified to teach it.

And now MCPS wants to expand it to 6 regionals? Makes zero sense to do that.

Why would Taylor want to break something that is highly successful? I listen to staff, and it seems like they have already made up their minds, but don't really have the data to back up their actions. getting rid of the magnet programming will have negative consequences for the school district.

Who says it's highly successful? A few parents who don't want to change? I don't see it--there's just a few school clusters benefitting from the most selective programs (which points to the issue that the programs are too far away or too inaccessible for some parts of the county).

Any programs that produces more NMSF winners than all other county high schools COMBINED, I would consider them highly successful.

Unfortunately, no program in the county does that.

Shows how little you know about magnets

Actually, it shows that I know more about the magnets than you do.
No program in the county produces more NMSFS than all the other county schools combined. None

appears magnet programs collectively produced 87 (blair, RM, and PHS) out of 140 total for mcps. that's pretty special if you ask me

That's collectively, not single program.

Genius.

That was the claim, idiot

Oh nice. The magnet program does produce more NMSF than all other high schools combined. It’s a factually correct statement. Use your common sense. Dimwit.

Nope, not even close.

2025: Blair 42, all other MCPS high schools 98: https://www.mymcmedia.org/158-county-students-named-national-merit-semifinalists/
2024: Blair 41, all other MCPS high schools 121 https://www.mymcmedia.org/186-county-students-named-national-merit-semifinalists/
2023:

Wow, you are really not very smart. MCPS magnet program includes RMIB and PHS too. Where are their numbers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I might have the wrong type or unpopular type of view of these things.

But our kids didn't get into the GT or magnet programs. There were a couple of years where they made it to the lottery but didn't get selected. The same with some of their classmates and our neighbors.

Personally for our family we were okay with it.

The GT, IB and magnet programs are supposed to be for the academically elite, where only the top get in. We were perfectly fine with our kids not making it and going to our local school and is one of the reasons why we chose to live where we do.

As others are trying to say, if you increase the number and seats of the programs, it dilutes the programs and isn't as rigorous or advanced like how the programs are now. Which people are saying they are okay with because it suits the needs of the many instead of the very few.

But another way of looking at it, is that maybe MCPS should be focusing on improving the instruction and quality at their individual schools. So those students who don't get in to the county wide programs (either by not quite qualifying or just not get selected by the lottery) will still get the class selection and level that that they need. Instead of having some mediocre programs that might not be better than some of the local schools around here. And the issue with the offering of the potentially mediocre is that it sounds like they're going to change the current countywide program which is considered top tier.

I had to stop myself from posting in this thread:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1287572.page

Because know that people will attack me as entitled. But I think there's something very wrong if a school doesn't have a track for students to take Algebra I by seventh grade and they have to look to going to a different school just to get on that track. But that just goes to show how there are different standards at different schools within the county and this is starting at elementary school. By the time students get to high school and eligible for these magnet/regional programs, students from different schools won't be on the same level based on the math tracks offered by their elementary schools.

Well noted.

Are you willing to fund other schools differentially enough for them to provide that level of education to their population in need of greater rigor, given that that might require smaller classes than in your area? Are you willing to fund much better ability identification, so that the needs of kids with potential are addressed via public mechanisms where family-based prep currently dominates?

This likely would mean higher taxes or less funding for your area, presuming the area you chose is as you describe because of the relatively high wealth/academic support available from families.

I'm all for provide resources and funding to help raise up disadvantaged and at risk student groups and they absolutely should.

BUT I am not willing to pay higher taxes if I do not see that I'm getting the value from it or even worse less than before. ie how MCPS appears to be lowering the standards for everyone and trying to take away advanced tracks.

Part of the issue with what MCPS is doing, as others have been posting, is that MCPS is lowering the bar rather than trying to bring the groups up to it.

It should not cost extra money to bring higher level classes to all schools.

How do you expect that to be the case? Where there is relative homogeneity of academic ability, there is less need for differentiation/cohorting, while more heterogeneous-ability populations require more, which is more logistically challenging, then requiring more funding to deliver.

This can be so whether that heterogeniety distributes more across the high end or the low end, though typically addressing differential needs of those with significant barriers -- intellectual, emotional, physical, linguistic, etc. -- is more costly than addressing those of students whose differential needs can be met with greater breadth/depth/rigor/pace. Moreover, schools addressing a higher proportion of the former (barriers), though they may receive some differential funding, do not receive enough to address the challenge in full, and then typically are faced both with that and with smaller, less logistically manageable (more costly) cohorts of those with high-end need.

But we're talking about higher level classes here. So ideally the cohort should be similar and a certain level of mastery of the content area and not have as much of the differences that you described that makes it harder to manage a class right?

Unless MCPS just lets anyone into those classes and then there are those types of differences within a cohort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I might have the wrong type or unpopular type of view of these things.

But our kids didn't get into the GT or magnet programs. There were a couple of years where they made it to the lottery but didn't get selected. The same with some of their classmates and our neighbors.

Personally for our family we were okay with it.

The GT, IB and magnet programs are supposed to be for the academically elite, where only the top get in. We were perfectly fine with our kids not making it and going to our local school and is one of the reasons why we chose to live where we do.

As others are trying to say, if you increase the number and seats of the programs, it dilutes the programs and isn't as rigorous or advanced like how the programs are now. Which people are saying they are okay with because it suits the needs of the many instead of the very few.

But another way of looking at it, is that maybe MCPS should be focusing on improving the instruction and quality at their individual schools. So those students who don't get in to the county wide programs (either by not quite qualifying or just not get selected by the lottery) will still get the class selection and level that that they need. Instead of having some mediocre programs that might not be better than some of the local schools around here. And the issue with the offering of the potentially mediocre is that it sounds like they're going to change the current countywide program which is considered top tier.

I had to stop myself from posting in this thread:
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1287572.page

Because know that people will attack me as entitled. But I think there's something very wrong if a school doesn't have a track for students to take Algebra I by seventh grade and they have to look to going to a different school just to get on that track. But that just goes to show how there are different standards at different schools within the county and this is starting at elementary school. By the time students get to high school and eligible for these magnet/regional programs, students from different schools won't be on the same level based on the math tracks offered by their elementary schools.

Well noted.

Are you willing to fund other schools differentially enough for them to provide that level of education to their population in need of greater rigor, given that that might require smaller classes than in your area? Are you willing to fund much better ability identification, so that the needs of kids with potential are addressed via public mechanisms where family-based prep currently dominates?

This likely would mean higher taxes or less funding for your area, presuming the area you chose is as you describe because of the relatively high wealth/academic support available from families.

I'm all for provide resources and funding to help raise up disadvantaged and at risk student groups and they absolutely should.

BUT I am not willing to pay higher taxes if I do not see that I'm getting the value from it or even worse less than before. ie how MCPS appears to be lowering the standards for everyone and trying to take away advanced tracks.

Part of the issue with what MCPS is doing, as others have been posting, is that MCPS is lowering the bar rather than trying to bring the groups up to it.

It should not cost extra money to bring higher level classes to all schools.

How do you expect that to be the case? Where there is relative homogeneity of academic ability, there is less need for differentiation/cohorting, while more heterogeneous-ability populations require more, which is more logistically challenging, then requiring more funding to deliver.

This can be so whether that heterogeniety distributes more across the high end or the low end, though typically addressing differential needs of those with significant barriers -- intellectual, emotional, physical, linguistic, etc. -- is more costly than addressing those of students whose differential needs can be met with greater breadth/depth/rigor/pace. Moreover, schools addressing a higher proportion of the former (barriers), though they may receive some differential funding, do not receive enough to address the challenge in full, and then typically are faced both with that and with smaller, less logistically manageable (more costly) cohorts of those with high-end need.

But we're talking about higher level classes here. So ideally the cohort should be similar and a certain level of mastery of the content area and not have as much of the differences that you described that makes it harder to manage a class right?

Unless MCPS just lets anyone into those classes and then there are those types of differences within a cohort.

Also with the additional funding it can mean the class sizes don't have a minimum. So if only ten students are eligible and capable of taking the higher level class, then they should allocate a class for those ten students. It would benefit them even more to be in a smaller class.

[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:Pushback on the viability of recreating magnet programs on regional basis:

https://bethesdamagazine.com/2025/08/13/mcps-program-changes-concerns/

Good, and we need a lot more of this. It was strategic that they introduced this proposal during the summer, when fewer parents and teachers are paying attention. They sought no input, and they thought they could build momentum for it before there the pushback.

The best comment is the final line: “Because we can have all these wonderful regions … but if we still have a disparity in the outcomes, are we really putting the equity lens on that?” This is what I keep coming back to regarding the proposal: what does it actually fix? What's the point of destroying these great programs? There's no logic or rationale to it.

They are not destroying the programs. They are expanding access to the programs for the great many who are able to handle the rigor but did not have application luck.

They ARE dismantling the magnet programs. There are insufficient teachers who can teach advanced programs. From the article: Taylor said the district’s recommendation includes areas of certification the district offers, but he doesn’t know if there’s interest from faculty to “dive in and hyper-specialize.”

He doesn't know. That means he is making decisions with insufficient information. You can't expand programs without trained, hyper-specialized teachers for those programs.

The actual number of highly able students are insufficient to form regional magnets. We aren't provided information on these numbers because it likely would show that the number of highly able students cab't support rigorous magnets in all regions.

+1 The regional IB programs IBDP pass rate is much lower than RMIB's. That tells you that even the 4 regional programs they created a few years ago aren't as successful. Those programs don't offer some of the HL classes that RMIB does. Why? Because there is not enough interest and probably the teachers don't want to teach it/aren't certified to teach it.

And now MCPS wants to expand it to 6 regionals? Makes zero sense to do that.

Why would Taylor want to break something that is highly successful? I listen to staff, and it seems like they have already made up their minds, but don't really have the data to back up their actions. getting rid of the magnet programming will have negative consequences for the school district.

Who says it's highly successful? A few parents who don't want to change? I don't see it--there's just a few school clusters benefitting from the most selective programs (which points to the issue that the programs are too far away or too inaccessible for some parts of the county).

Any programs that produces more NMSF winners than all other county high schools COMBINED, I would consider them highly successful.

Unfortunately, no program in the county does that.

Shows how little you know about magnets

Actually, it shows that I know more about the magnets than you do.
No program in the county produces more NMSFS than all the other county schools combined. None

appears magnet programs collectively produced 87 (blair, RM, and PHS) out of 140 total for mcps. that's pretty special if you ask me

That's collectively, not single program.

Genius.

That was the claim, idiot

Oh nice. The magnet program does produce more NMSF than all other high schools combined. It’s a factually correct statement. Use your common sense. Dimwit.

Nope, not even close.

2025: Blair 42, all other MCPS high schools 98: https://www.mymcmedia.org/158-county-students-named-national-merit-semifinalists/
2024: Blair 41, all other MCPS high schools 121 https://www.mymcmedia.org/186-county-students-named-national-merit-semifinalists/
2023:

Wow, you are really not very smart. MCPS magnet program includes RMIB and PHS too. Where are their numbers?

Huh? There's no "magnet program" that includes multiple schools. There are lots of individual magnet programs (about a dozen.) People usually say "the magnet program" to refer either to Blair, or at certain individual schools they might mean that school's magnet program.