Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so bad that even parents are like- gifted kids will figure it out. Why? Why don’t they deserve the same resources and consideration that low performing kids do? Just because they don’t cause problems doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a high quality education. We pay for special ed teachers to run tiny sheltered classes for the disabled. Why can’t we pay gifted teachers to run tiny sheltered classes (magnets!) for the highly able students?

I know- it’s the anti-intellectualism of America. Those kids will be just fine. Don’t be all up on your high horse, there, bucko. Throw in some anti-Asian and anti-immigrant sentiment and you’ve got the current response to magnets.

It’s infuriating.

As a parent of a child with autism, I kindly ask you to refrain from acting like kids with disabilities all get "tiny sheltered classes". It is extremely difficult to get into those classes and the kids that do really need them (and many more also need them but are not able to access them).

You’re right of course- they don’t. But what if MCPS proposed getting rid of those classes altogether? Those kids will be “fine”. They don’t need specialized instruction. Have them take virtual classes. We would never do that, and that’s my point. Why is it okay to deliberately ignore the needs of the gifted kids? And my answer was- ‘Merica, dude.

I'd be thrilled if my kids could take some classes virtual and there were multiple families with special needs kids in the MVA to support their kids better. Your posts are really insulting. When they cut out the MVA they also cut an autism program. They didn't cut your precious program that caters to rich families, they cut programs like hte MVA, Autism, and a trade program, all that are often more for lower income than higher income.

You are truly offensive. All our kids deserve higher-level classes. The regional makes sense to offer more. My child doesn't have enough math to graduate right now. Its a huge issue for some of us. You are tone death and will not get any support if you keep preaching like you do. The W schools where many of these kids come from have enough offerings. Our kids don't.

They NEED to increase offerings so all our smart kids have access to the classes they need and want at their home schools. And, if that means readucing some at the W schools, oh well. Some of our kids don't want Blair because it's highly restrictive in the classes and offers no flexibility.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so bad that even parents are like- gifted kids will figure it out. Why? Why don’t they deserve the same resources and consideration that low performing kids do? Just because they don’t cause problems doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a high quality education. We pay for special ed teachers to run tiny sheltered classes for the disabled. Why can’t we pay gifted teachers to run tiny sheltered classes (magnets!) for the highly able students?

I know- it’s the anti-intellectualism of America. Those kids will be just fine. Don’t be all up on your high horse, there, bucko. Throw in some anti-Asian and anti-immigrant sentiment and you’ve got the current response to magnets.

It’s infuriating.

As a parent of a child with autism, I kindly ask you to refrain from acting like kids with disabilities all get "tiny sheltered classes". It is extremely difficult to get into those classes and the kids that do really need them (and many more also need them but are not able to access them).

You’re right of course- they don’t. But what if MCPS proposed getting rid of those classes altogether? Those kids will be “fine”. They don’t need specialized instruction. Have them take virtual classes. We would never do that, and that’s my point. Why is it okay to deliberately ignore the needs of the gifted kids? And my answer was- ‘Merica, dude.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so bad that even parents are like- gifted kids will figure it out. Why? Why don’t they deserve the same resources and consideration that low performing kids do? Just because they don’t cause problems doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a high quality education. We pay for special ed teachers to run tiny sheltered classes for the disabled. Why can’t we pay gifted teachers to run tiny sheltered classes (magnets!) for the highly able students?

I know- it’s the anti-intellectualism of America. Those kids will be just fine. Don’t be all up on your high horse, there, bucko. Throw in some anti-Asian and anti-immigrant sentiment and you’ve got the current response to magnets.

It’s infuriating.

As a parent of a child with autism, I kindly ask you to refrain from acting like kids with disabilities all get "tiny sheltered classes". It is extremely difficult to get into those classes and the kids that do really need them (and many more also need them but are not able to access them).

You’re right of course- they don’t. But what if MCPS proposed getting rid of those classes altogether? Those kids will be “fine”. They don’t need specialized instruction. Have them take virtual classes. We would never do that, and that’s my point. Why is it okay to deliberately ignore the needs of the gifted kids? And my answer was- ‘Merica, dude.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so bad that even parents are like- gifted kids will figure it out. Why? Why don’t they deserve the same resources and consideration that low performing kids do? Just because they don’t cause problems doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a high quality education. We pay for special ed teachers to run tiny sheltered classes for the disabled. Why can’t we pay gifted teachers to run tiny sheltered classes (magnets!) for the highly able students?

I know- it’s the anti-intellectualism of America. Those kids will be just fine. Don’t be all up on your high horse, there, bucko. Throw in some anti-Asian and anti-immigrant sentiment and you’ve got the current response to magnets.

It’s infuriating.

As a parent of a child with autism, I kindly ask you to refrain from acting like kids with disabilities all get "tiny sheltered classes". It is extremely difficult to get into those classes and the kids that do really need them (and many more also need them but are not able to access them).

You’re right of course- they don’t. But what if MCPS proposed getting rid of those classes altogether? Those kids will be “fine”. They don’t need specialized instruction. Have them take virtual classes. We would never do that, and that’s my point. Why is it okay to deliberately ignore the needs of the gifted kids? And my answer was- ‘Merica, dude.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so bad that even parents are like- gifted kids will figure it out. Why? Why don’t they deserve the same resources and consideration that low performing kids do? Just because they don’t cause problems doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a high quality education. We pay for special ed teachers to run tiny sheltered classes for the disabled. Why can’t we pay gifted teachers to run tiny sheltered classes (magnets!) for the highly able students?

I know- it’s the anti-intellectualism of America. Those kids will be just fine. Don’t be all up on your high horse, there, bucko. Throw in some anti-Asian and anti-immigrant sentiment and you’ve got the current response to magnets.

It’s infuriating.

As a parent of a child with autism, I kindly ask you to refrain from acting like kids with disabilities all get "tiny sheltered classes". It is extremely difficult to get into those classes and the kids that do really need them (and many more also need them but are not able to access them).

You’re right of course- they don’t. But what if MCPS proposed getting rid of those classes altogether? Those kids will be “fine”. They don’t need specialized instruction. Have them take virtual classes. We would never do that, and that’s my point. Why is it okay to deliberately ignore the needs of the gifted kids? And my answer was- ‘Merica, dude.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so bad that even parents are like- gifted kids will figure it out. Why? Why don’t they deserve the same resources and consideration that low performing kids do? Just because they don’t cause problems doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a high quality education. We pay for special ed teachers to run tiny sheltered classes for the disabled. Why can’t we pay gifted teachers to run tiny sheltered classes (magnets!) for the highly able students?

I know- it’s the anti-intellectualism of America. Those kids will be just fine. Don’t be all up on your high horse, there, bucko. Throw in some anti-Asian and anti-immigrant sentiment and you’ve got the current response to magnets.

It’s infuriating.

As a parent of a child with autism, I kindly ask you to refrain from acting like kids with disabilities all get "tiny sheltered classes". It is extremely difficult to get into those classes and the kids that do really need them (and many more also need them but are not able to access them).

You’re right of course- they don’t. But what if MCPS proposed getting rid of those classes altogether? Those kids will be “fine”. They don’t need specialized instruction. Have them take virtual classes. We would never do that, and that’s my point. Why is it okay to deliberately ignore the needs of the gifted kids? And my answer was- ‘Merica, dude.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so bad that even parents are like- gifted kids will figure it out. Why? Why don’t they deserve the same resources and consideration that low performing kids do? Just because they don’t cause problems doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a high quality education. We pay for special ed teachers to run tiny sheltered classes for the disabled. Why can’t we pay gifted teachers to run tiny sheltered classes (magnets!) for the highly able students?

I know- it’s the anti-intellectualism of America. Those kids will be just fine. Don’t be all up on your high horse, there, bucko. Throw in some anti-Asian and anti-immigrant sentiment and you’ve got the current response to magnets.

It’s infuriating.

As a parent of a child with autism, I kindly ask you to refrain from acting like kids with disabilities all get "tiny sheltered classes". It is extremely difficult to get into those classes and the kids that do really need them (and many more also need them but are not able to access them).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so bad that even parents are like- gifted kids will figure it out. Why? Why don’t they deserve the same resources and consideration that low performing kids do? Just because they don’t cause problems doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a high quality education. We pay for special ed teachers to run tiny sheltered classes for the disabled. Why can’t we pay gifted teachers to run tiny sheltered classes (magnets!) for the highly able students?

I know- it’s the anti-intellectualism of America. Those kids will be just fine. Don’t be all up on your high horse, there, bucko. Throw in some anti-Asian and anti-immigrant sentiment and you’ve got the current response to magnets.

It’s infuriating.

As a parent of a child with autism, I kindly ask you to refrain from acting like kids with disabilities all get "tiny sheltered classes". It is extremely difficult to get into those classes and the kids that do really need them (and many more also need them but are not able to access them).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Throwing resources at low performers absolutely will lift them up. And if your kid is really a high performers, they will be a high performer with or without resources.

We don't have an infinite amount of resources though. And why should high performers be ignored? Making the magnets all regional is ignoring the very high performers.

FWIW, I grew up lower income and went to an awful school.

+100

The state should really invest the most in the top quartile in order promote excellence and achievement to benefit our society overall.

Any honest teacher will tell you that the differences intellectual capacity are significant and important. Some kids work hard and have good personalities but are never going to be acing organic chemistry or advanced calculus. And that is OK. There are many low-skilled jobs that are essential to our society and confer value and dignity to those who perform them.

There are many high-skill jobs that don't need organic chemistry or advanced calculus, and can be performed students who'd rather take a class on car mechanics than quantum mechanics.

That's why organic chemistry or discrete math are only needed by a very small amount of students who can manage the challenge and really hope to be the top of their major to push the boundary of human knowledge and bring large benefit to human-beings. The top 10% students in HSs won't need these classes, hence the justification for the existing county-wide program to serve a very small community. Regional programs can serve the top 10% students needs by providing MVC, linear algebra, Physics C, etc. that are more basic college-level courses.

Anonymous wrote:It’s so bad that even parents are like- gifted kids will figure it out. Why? Why don’t they deserve the same resources and consideration that low performing kids do? Just because they don’t cause problems doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a high quality education. We pay for special ed teachers to run tiny sheltered classes for the disabled. Why can’t we pay gifted teachers to run tiny sheltered classes (magnets!) for the highly able students?

I know- it’s the anti-intellectualism of America. Those kids will be just fine. Don’t be all up on your high horse, there, bucko. Throw in some anti-Asian and anti-immigrant sentiment and you’ve got the current response to magnets.

It’s infuriating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity should mean that everyone gets what they need to succeed to their highest potential. Gifted kids need challenge and rigor or they are highly likely to disengage in school (read the literature on gifted kids). Focusing only on the lowest achievement group is not equity.

If you have 3 gifted kids and 1,000 kids who are lagging, where should you invest resources?

Again, if you kids is truly gifted they will figure themselves out. If your kid can’t figure out for themselves how to get the best out of MCPS you should maybe reconsider if they are truly gifted or motivated. My kid found all sorts of ways to get MCPS to be exactly what she wanted and needed, but it required work and effort on her part, not the entire school district twisting itself into a pretzel for one kid.

It's an insane lie to pretend that those 3 kids: needs cost as much as other the 1000 kids' needs. Stop it.

My intuitive response to this scenario is to group these 3 gifted kids together, and let them figure out ways to challenge themselves and learn together with minimal supervision while resources are dominantly spent on the rest 997 kids. What MCPS is trying to do right now, is separating the 1000 kids equally into 3 regions, and give the 1 gifted kid in each region ZERO resource and ZERO peership.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Throwing resources at low performers absolutely will lift them up. And if your kid is really a high performers, they will be a high performer with or without resources.

We don't have an infinite amount of resources though. And why should high performers be ignored? Making the magnets all regional is ignoring the very high performers.

FWIW, I grew up lower income and went to an awful school.

+100

The state should really invest the most in the top quartile in order promote excellence and achievement to benefit our society overall.

Any honest teacher will tell you that the differences intellectual capacity are significant and important. Some kids work hard and have good personalities but are never going to be acing organic chemistry or advanced calculus. And that is OK. There are many low-skilled jobs that are essential to our society and confer value and dignity to those who perform them.

There are many high-skill jobs that don't need organic chemistry or advanced calculus, and can be performed students who'd rather take a class on car mechanics than quantum mechanics.

Anonymous wrote:Throwing resources at low performers absolutely will lift them up. And if your kid is really a high performers, they will be a high performer with or without resources.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Throwing resources at low performers absolutely will lift them up. And if your kid is really a high performers, they will be a high performer with or without resources.

We don't have an infinite amount of resources though. And why should high performers be ignored? Making the magnets all regional is ignoring the very high performers.

FWIW, I grew up lower income and went to an awful school.

+100

The state should really invest the most in the top quartile in order promote excellence and achievement to benefit our society overall.

Any honest teacher will tell you that the differences intellectual capacity are significant and important. Some kids work hard and have good personalities but are never going to be acing organic chemistry or advanced calculus. And that is OK. There are many low-skilled jobs that are essential to our society and confer value and dignity to those who perform them.