Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
Reply to "Another article about the magnet programs in Washington Post "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous] we are asking just how mcps proposes to make changes to only admit "qualified" students, including those who don't test high, because that is the crux of it.[/quote] MCPS hasn't proposed to do anything at all. MCPS paid a consultant to do a report that made recommendations. Also, why do people (I don't know whether it's just you, or other people too) keep using the term "urms"? The consultant's report doesn't use the term. And people aren't using the term "orms", which would be the logical corollary.[/quote] Presumably, MCPS hired this company to do the study because they felt that certain groups weren't represented enough. MCPS is focused on closing the achievement gap. Put two and two together. It usually equals 4.[/quote] Completely wrong... This whole study spun out of the JEE policy on how students transfer from school to school. The board wanted to do away with sibling preference in the immersion program while at the same time BCC PTA was unhappy about immersion kids continuing on to the highschool after immersion ended in middle school. When they came out with the proposed changes, there was a huge back lash from several different communities (including those in other magnets) that would be impacted. This prompted the board to ask whether it was worthwhile to step back and look at all the "choice" programs and examine whether they were "achieving their original intent" since inception. So it originally had nothing to do with the test in magnets.[/quote] Great, so no need to change the test-in magnet process. So, why are some people saying we should include "non cognitive" abilities and what not in the test in magnets? [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics