Anonymous wrote:Did anyone get any updates on where they are with new options regarding the boundary study and/or holding school option?

I heard those new options would be coming out in late November.

Anonymous wrote:Thank you for going and reporting back. So much here is extremely alarming, esp #4 and #5 above.

I hope the County Council is paying attention to answers like "we'll put more money into it if it's not successful" because if that's the case, this is going to be far more expensive than presented. Where is that money going to come from? At the expense of K-8 education? The 85% of Grade 9-12 students who aren't in one of these special programs?

Jennie said 25% of students will be in these special programs as the goal. Their numbers just keep on changing because they don't need to take responsibility for what they say.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:3. A NEC/DCC transportation POC was there, and said they would use the NEC/DCC transportation model rather than the HS-HS model so to make sure visiting neighborhoods. I've checked the 2016 METIS report and estimated the 2025 dollar-equivalent: it's about 1.6 million/year operating cost for DCC. As a contrast, the Oct. 16 BOE meeting slides had $740K/year operating cost estimation. So expecting the yearly operating cost to double at least..

Do you know the name of the person who said this and are you positive they know what they're talking about? Because both Jeannie Franklin and the chief of operations (Mamoon) both said on Monday that this had not been decided yet and made it sound like it wasn't going to be decided for months or maybe not even until 2027... I mean, maybe they have changed their position quickly based on feedback, which would be great and would be the right thing to do, but I also really wonder if this is just a mistake or misstatement from someone lower down who's not in the know (they being a bunch of lower-level people to these meetings too alongside the high-level ones.)

Also the DCC and NEC offer full transportation from neighborhood stops just like if you were going to your local HS (so multiple stops per neighborhood sometimes)... I'd honestly be shocked if they do that, versus an amended version of central stop transportation where they *do* guarantee a stop within a couple miles of your home (current central stop transportation does not), so that also makes me wonder about the accuracy of this info. But I would love to be wrong and maybe this is a pleasant surprise from MCPS for once!

Sorry I'm not good at remembering names. She said is the POC for consortia transportation. But CO folks can say anything and change later on. If county doesn't give them enough money, they can always scale it down and blame the county council. I want to make a note that this is something new and I'll keep an eye on the December county council meeting when MCPS presents the transportation budget to make sure at least the model and cost are consistent.

Did anyone get any updates on where they are with new options regarding the boundary study and/or holding school option?

Thank you for going and reporting back. So much here is extremely alarming, esp #4 and #5 above.

I hope the County Council is paying attention to answers like "we'll put more money into it if it's not successful" because if that's the case, this is going to be far more expensive than presented. Where is that money going to come from? At the expense of K-8 education? The 85% of Grade 9-12 students who aren't in one of these special programs?

Anonymous wrote:3. A NEC/DCC transportation POC was there, and said they would use the NEC/DCC transportation model rather than the HS-HS model so to make sure visiting neighborhoods. I've checked the 2016 METIS report and estimated the 2025 dollar-equivalent: it's about 1.6 million/year operating cost for DCC. As a contrast, the Oct. 16 BOE meeting slides had $740K/year operating cost estimation. So expecting the yearly operating cost to double at least..

Do you know the name of the person who said this and are you positive they know what they're talking about? Because both Jeannie Franklin and the chief of operations (Mamoon) both said on Monday that this had not been decided yet and made it sound like it wasn't going to be decided for months or maybe not even until 2027... I mean, maybe they have changed their position quickly based on feedback, which would be great and would be the right thing to do, but I also really wonder if this is just a mistake or misstatement from someone lower down who's not in the know (they being a bunch of lower-level people to these meetings too alongside the high-level ones.)

Also the DCC and NEC offer full transportation from neighborhood stops just like if you were going to your local HS (so multiple stops per neighborhood sometimes)... I'd honestly be shocked if they do that, versus an amended version of central stop transportation where they *do* guarantee a stop within a couple miles of your home (current central stop transportation does not), so that also makes me wonder about the accuracy of this info. But I would love to be wrong and maybe this is a pleasant surprise from MCPS for once!

Put all your money in MAP training academies!

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand the point of these meetings. They don't seem to be focused on gathering feedback in any systematic way. They are providing inconsistent answers to questions and are constantly changing things. Why should people take the time to go to these things to get information that is likely to be either incorrect or changed in the future?

My attitude is to fight till the last minute. Although I’m going to lose, at least I fought. My elder one (currently a HSchooler interested in political science) fought together with me and he learnt the first-hand dirtiness of what politics looks like.

I don't understand the point of these meetings. They don't seem to be focused on gathering feedback in any systematic way. They are providing inconsistent answers to questions and are constantly changing things. Why should people take the time to go to these things to get information that is likely to be either incorrect or changed in the future?

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Thank you for sharing all of this.

How awful and embarrassing for MCPS. They are coming across as extremely incompetent.

I also continue to be completely perplexed as to the why. Why is this being so rushed? Why are they so rigid in their opposition to community feedback? I assume Taylor is driving all of this, but why is he being so stubborn about this and how has he convinced/coerced the BOE not just to go along with him in the face of all this community opposition but to not even ask questions about it?

The WHY is indeed curious. The stated reason of equity is not persuasive, since we already know these programs won't be meaningfully equitable, at least not right out of the gate.

Hilarious that Jeannie thinks fashion design and game design programs would be interchangeable and wouldn't require massive overhauls. That shows how inept these people are.

Anonymous wrote:And where do they think all the money is coming from? Do they not read the news?

+1 to all the posts above

And where do they think all the money is coming from? Do they not read the news?

Wow. Thank you for sharing all of this.

How awful and embarrassing for MCPS. They are coming across as extremely incompetent.

I also continue to be completely perplexed as to the why. Why is this being so rushed? Why are they so rigid in their opposition to community feedback? I assume Taylor is driving all of this, but why is he being so stubborn about this and how has he convinced/coerced the BOE not just to go along with him in the face of all this community opposition but to not even ask questions about it?

I hope this thread can collect ppl's feeling/feedback from last night's in-person meeting as well as new information. I'll share first my experience:

1. Central office sent like 50 employees, so people can't gather in large groups or voice out loudly. Essie and Nikki were both in the feedback room, but they didn't host a gathered session but rather only allow individual discussion. Jennie was in the cafeteria presenting the regional model, which consistently gathered good size of audience (~ 30 or more). It's like a conference poster session setting.

2. They will present a "version 3" regional model in Nov. 20 BOE meeting, where some details will be modified.

3. A NEC/DCC transportation POC was there, and said they would use the NEC/DCC transportation model rather than the HS-HS model so to make sure visiting neighborhoods. I've checked the 2016 METIS report and estimated the 2025 dollar-equivalent: it's about 1.6 million/year operating cost for DCC. As a contrast, the Oct. 16 BOE meeting slides had $740K/year operating cost estimation. So expecting the yearly operating cost to double at least.

4. Nikki and Jennie gave very different answers to questions. They appeared thinking right on spot of whatever answer they can think of. For example, I asked if a program is later evaluated not sustainable (e.g., low enrollment, can't acquire teachers, poor score metrics, etc.), will this program get cancelled across-board. Nikki said they would put more money into that program until it's successful, and no program would fail. Jennie gave a much more realistic reply, although still quite funny. They would maintain the same "theme" but change the program to another "sub-theme" to see if it would work. She gave an example that they could change "fashion design" to "game design", as if they would require the same set of expertise from teachers.

5. STEM program POC said she hadn't contacted SMCS coordinators nor teachers for curriculum design. She "will do" once the regional model gets approved. So current 7th grader need to make a decision based on a program without curriculum or teaching staffs. Jennie said the STEM program will have the 8th period to accommodate the additional CS courses.

6. I've told two staffs that my questions/feedback using the online google form never got addressed in Q&A doc or BOE meeting. They told me to "keep on submitting another form".

7. Jennie said the criteria-based programs won't use lottery. She might consider use local-norm of MAP-M and other metric scores if waitlist is too long for one region over another.

My gut feeling: Jennie is the one leading the design of details. If you have any detailed suggestion/tweak that you think might be very useful, contact her directly. Nikki and Essie know absolutely no detail and no interest to know at all. So they say nonsense. This entire regional model is an absolute "top-down" thing and they have absolutely no interest of compromising a little bit (e.g., slow down, scale back, use community feedback). The current 7th grader will be the unfortunate guinea pig.