Reply to Blind item: Regional criteria "magnets" will be lottery

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Blind item: Regional criteria "magnets" will be lottery"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-- Not MVC Mom[/quote]

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

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

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

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