Anonymous wrote:In Blair SMCS, a couple of years ago there was a new grad from UMD teaching coding. They by themselves were entry level in coding, barely knew things and were very strict on only accepting the algorithm they could understand. Kids didn’t like them because they quickly discovered the fact, and they left in one year.

Now a new CS teacher pretty much in the same status, except this time they had an open mind. They acknowledged that they are here to learn from the students and from the projects, and students helped one another in get the ball rolling pretty smoothly.

Now imagine what would happen in another regional program with CS teachers of these kinds. The former one would plant a seed that coding is either right or wrong, which is horrible. The latter type is great, only when students are great too.

+1. And if Blair's SMCS has trouble getting decent coding teachers, imagine what will happen at the other schools. That second teacher also got the culture of the magnet.

Anonymous wrote:I don't have first-hand knowledge to address your questions, OP, but common sense would lead me to say "absolutely not" to the question in the post title.

I do find it flabbergasting that none of these questions came up once from a Board member during a 5 hour meeting yesterday.

Seems like the board has been pummeled into public submission. Hope they are asking questions behind the scenes.

They will reallocate teachers from other schools when they decrease enrollment. That's why some schools who don't have a large course offering are concerned as what will be cut?

In Blair SMCS, a couple of years ago there was a new grad from UMD teaching coding. They by themselves were entry level in coding, barely knew things and were very strict on only accepting the algorithm they could understand. Kids didn’t like them because they quickly discovered the fact, and they left in one year.

Now a new CS teacher pretty much in the same status, except this time they had an open mind. They acknowledged that they are here to learn from the students and from the projects, and students helped one another in get the ball rolling pretty smoothly.

Now imagine what would happen in another regional program with CS teachers of these kinds. The former one would plant a seed that coding is either right or wrong, which is horrible. The latter type is great, only when students are great too.

Anonymous wrote:Read my lips. No new teachers. Trust me on that one.

So we happen to have a bunch of NIH post docs already at MCPS to create four new programs along the lines of Blair SMCS? Because if the teachers are not all at the same high level, then the proposed plan will not equitably executed. There’s a difference between teachers at MIT and teachers at the local community college.

You could get an elementary teacher who decided to go to high school. You just never know. Often they force teachers to learn new subjects that are out of their depth. How do I know? Happened to me! Took me a couple of years to get out of that pigeonhole (I was forced to teach coding and robotics AND source my own robots because the school’s were too old. HATED it). You can teach out of your curriculum area for one year. They take advantage of that.

Read my lips. No new teachers. Trust me on that one.

So we happen to have a bunch of NIH post docs already at MCPS to create four new programs along the lines of Blair SMCS? Because if the teachers are not all at the same high level, then the proposed plan will not equitably executed. There’s a difference between teachers at MIT and teachers at the local community college.

Yes, I think it is possible. There will need to be some moving of staff, but that is normal each year. Teachers are used to learning new curriculum quickly. We don’t like it, but we do it often.

Some of the Blair teachers will probably be re-allocated to the other 4 STEM programs. Blair's overall enrollment will decline with the new boundaries, and the size of the Blair magnet will probably also go down.

But still, these teachers would have to be willing to be re-assigned, and there are nowhere near enough for 4 new quality programs. I don't understand why this regional program concept wasn't attempted with 3 or 4 regions instead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have first-hand knowledge to address your questions, OP, but common sense would lead me to say "absolutely not" to the question in the post title.

I do find it flabbergasting that none of these questions came up once from a Board member during a 5 hour meeting yesterday.

And especially not plausible if we’re talking about the same high level of instruction, teachers, funding, and course selection for all six programs in all six regions.

By teachers, I mean the highly credentialed ones found at Blair SMCS.

Looks like it’s down to five program themes in each region. My point still stands.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have first-hand knowledge to address your questions, OP, but common sense would lead me to say "absolutely not" to the question in the post title.

I do find it flabbergasting that none of these questions came up once from a Board member during a 5 hour meeting yesterday.

And especially not plausible if we’re talking about the same high level of instruction, teachers, funding, and course selection for all six programs in all six regions.

By teachers, I mean the highly credentialed ones found at Blair SMCS.

Anonymous wrote:I don't have first-hand knowledge to address your questions, OP, but common sense would lead me to say "absolutely not" to the question in the post title.

I do find it flabbergasting that none of these questions came up once from a Board member during a 5 hour meeting yesterday.

And especially not plausible if we’re talking about the same high level of instruction, teachers, funding, and course selection for all six programs in all six regions.

I don't have first-hand knowledge to address your questions, OP, but common sense would lead me to say "absolutely not" to the question in the post title.

I do find it flabbergasting that none of these questions came up once from a Board member during a 5 hour meeting yesterday.

MCPS enrollment is down:
https://wtop.com/montgomery-county/2025/10/montgomery-county-schools-see-student-enrollment-drop-project-its-part-of-trend/

Fewer students = no need for more teachers.

The tnew programs are mostly just regular classes rebranded so it's not very hardest stuff.

I'm not very familiar with how high school staffing works or with the details of the qualifications needed to teach in the various programs MCPS is proposing, so although it doesn't seem right to me, I would love to hear from folks who understand this better.

MCPS is saying there will not be any extra staffing for any of these programs (except for one program coordinator per school covering all programs at that school), and that the teachers will just come out of the regular staffing allocations at each high school. They have also said that the new programs will phase in so that teachers would only be teaching the program classes to 9th graders the first year, 9th and 10th the second, etc.

Does that seem like it will work? Do schools already have the staff needed to teach most or all of these classes, and will they have enough space in their schedules to add the new program classes without decreasing access to classes for non-program students? Will this still be true at schools that lose a lot of their staff due to drops in enrollment after the boundary changes? (I believe high schools lose about 4 teachers for every 100 students they lose?)

Or are any of the classes for the programs specialized enough that some schools may not already have the staff needed to teach them, and if so, how would they find the space in the staffing budget to add new teachers? Are there non-program classes they could cut to make this work? Would these specialized teachers be able to take over other standard classes for non-program students to make a full schedule, or would they need to hire these teachers at a 0.2 or 0.4 the first year and slowly build up (and would teachers be OK with that)?

The proposed classes for the various programs are here (pages 37-86), for reference: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DMJHXR4AA9BD/$file/Boundary%20Studies%20Program%20Analysis%20Update%20251016%20PPT%20REV.pdf