I'm curious which option current WJ Cluster families prefer: A, B, C or D.

To me, B appears the best outcome.

What's the latest status on this? Weren't we supposed to get additional options due to potential closing of SSIM?

Also, once the survey closes, how is the public involved thereafter? Is there a comment period on the Superintendent's proposal?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS school profiles lists a capacity of 1000 for Edison HS and an enrollment of 968. They don't have empty space. Maybe they only use half of the classrooms at any given time so they will have teachers share the classrooms? Can't MCPS just give a straight answer on this?

It sounds like there is some unbuilt space from what people are saying here, so they'd have to build it into classrooms. Its a trade school drawing students who are bused there from all over the county. They could maybe build it out but with what funds? It would make sense to build it out and offer more trade programs.

Right. First MCPS says they need to build the space. Then they say they are sending 500 Wheaton HS students to Edison CTE programs while simultaneously telling people they are going to keep Edison open to students countywide and putting out a CIP that includes $0 in funding to "build out" Edison. The story keeps changing. I suspect the real story is some people in North Bethesda insisted on keeping their schools 20%-30% empty despite systemwide declining enrollment, and the only way to make that work is to pretend there are 500 extra seats in Edison for Wheaton HS students to take...some kind of classes.

This is why the regional program doesn't work. They should offer advanced classes equally at all schools and keep the DCC and let the other schools do their own consortia. The idea of making it equitable and equal will not happen. This is all for show. Wheaton is a good school. They make it work now.

advanced classes at all schools means no need for consortia, including the DCC. the money for admin and buses can be spent at home schools

Correct, but MCPS is clear that they aren't expanding the course offerings so the corsortia is necessary.

consortia have not met their goals. time for something new

They did expand course offerings available to students who could travel. The regional model just makes the courses available to fewer kids with less transportation.

Students shouldn’t have to travel and there is no guarantee students will get into the schools they need to.

Which is the same as for the consortia model/DCC.

The DCC has buses and its a choice. But, all kids have choice and a lot get their first pick.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FYI - on the BOE's agenda today is a resolution to authorize the development of new Woodward boundary options that reflect the closure of SSIMS.

They are planning to release new options in November and have more community engagement in December.

On the one hand I am glad they won't be sticking with the horrible second round options that blatantly prioritize west county schools in the Woodward study in terms of facility utilization, split articulation and demographics. On the other hand I have zero faith that the next options won't be even more full on MAGA.

Shouldn’t the SSIMS idea be voted on first? Or they are just adding options in case it does happen?

Yeah they say the resolution does not authorize closing SSIMS so I think these will be options "just in case"

Anonymous wrote:FYI - on the BOE's agenda today is a resolution to authorize the development of new Woodward boundary options that reflect the closure of SSIMS.

They are planning to release new options in November and have more community engagement in December.

On the one hand I am glad they won't be sticking with the horrible second round options that blatantly prioritize west county schools in the Woodward study in terms of facility utilization, split articulation and demographics. On the other hand I have zero faith that the next options won't be even more full on MAGA.

Shouldn’t the SSIMS idea be voted on first? Or they are just adding options in case it does happen?

Anonymous wrote:FYI - on the BOE's agenda today is a resolution to authorize the development of new Woodward boundary options that reflect the closure of SSIMS.

They are planning to release new options in November and have more community engagement in December.

On the one hand I am glad they won't be sticking with the horrible second round options that blatantly prioritize west county schools in the Woodward study in terms of facility utilization, split articulation and demographics. On the other hand I have zero faith that the next options won't be even more full on MAGA.

New proposed timeline:

● November 2025: Additional boundary options released reflecting the possible future closure of SSIMS and redirection to Eastern and Sligo middle schools
● December 2025: Additional community engagement meetings and feedback collection
● February 5, 2026: Release of Superintendent’s Recommended Boundary Option
● February–March 2026: Board of Education work sessions and public hearings
● March 26, 2026: Board of Education final action on the Superintendent’s recommendation

Anonymous wrote:FYI - on the BOE's agenda today is a resolution to authorize the development of new Woodward boundary options that reflect the closure of SSIMS.

They are planning to release new options in November and have more community engagement in December.

On the one hand I am glad they won't be sticking with the horrible second round options that blatantly prioritize west county schools in the Woodward study in terms of facility utilization, split articulation and demographics. On the other hand I have zero faith that the next options won't be even more full on MAGA.

It’ll be option D and they’ll call it a day.

Good Christ more options?

FYI - on the BOE's agenda today is a resolution to authorize the development of new Woodward boundary options that reflect the closure of SSIMS.

They are planning to release new options in November and have more community engagement in December.

On the one hand I am glad they won't be sticking with the horrible second round options that blatantly prioritize west county schools in the Woodward study in terms of facility utilization, split articulation and demographics. On the other hand I have zero faith that the next options won't be even more full on MAGA.

Anonymous wrote:Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

This sounds about right but let's not make it easy or comfortable for these f$k3rs

Rough crowd. None of what you have to say matters anyway, the BOE and Co. Council will just do what they want to do that is in the name of equity, but really is just to cut costs, cost of buses, experienced teacher salaries, some curricular costs, as well as badly aging infrastructure costs, as best they can. They do not give one shit what any taxpayer and/or parent thinks and as long as the W schools, Wheaton not included, remain as they are and/or are no longer over capacity, the poor kids will take the brunt, and that's fine by the BOE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS school profiles lists a capacity of 1000 for Edison HS and an enrollment of 968. They don't have empty space. Maybe they only use half of the classrooms at any given time so they will have teachers share the classrooms? Can't MCPS just give a straight answer on this?

It sounds like there is some unbuilt space from what people are saying here, so they'd have to build it into classrooms. Its a trade school drawing students who are bused there from all over the county. They could maybe build it out but with what funds? It would make sense to build it out and offer more trade programs.

Right. First MCPS says they need to build the space. Then they say they are sending 500 Wheaton HS students to Edison CTE programs while simultaneously telling people they are going to keep Edison open to students countywide and putting out a CIP that includes $0 in funding to "build out" Edison. The story keeps changing. I suspect the real story is some people in North Bethesda insisted on keeping their schools 20%-30% empty despite systemwide declining enrollment, and the only way to make that work is to pretend there are 500 extra seats in Edison for Wheaton HS students to take...some kind of classes.

This is why the regional program doesn't work. They should offer advanced classes equally at all schools and keep the DCC and let the other schools do their own consortia. The idea of making it equitable and equal will not happen. This is all for show. Wheaton is a good school. They make it work now.

advanced classes at all schools means no need for consortia, including the DCC. the money for admin and buses can be spent at home schools

Correct, but MCPS is clear that they aren't expanding the course offerings so the corsortia is necessary.

consortia have not met their goals. time for something new

They did expand course offerings available to students who could travel. The regional model just makes the courses available to fewer kids with less transportation.

Students shouldn’t have to travel and there is no guarantee students will get into the schools they need to.

Which is the same as for the consortia model/DCC.

DP. No, it is not the same. The DCC offers more flexibility to students and transportation from students' neighborhoods. The regional program model offers very limited spots and very limited transportation. I happen to think they should get rid of the DCC, but also that they should not create all these programs. Instead they should do a more rigorous analysis of what the different schools offer in terms of coursework and certifications and address gaps as they occur instead of trying to superimpose a model that is intended to be uniform on schools and regions that are all very different.

I agree with you in the getting rid of consortia/magnets/regions, and on doing more analysis to see what individual schools need (with an eye toward improving individual schools so that kids don’t feel like they have to go to another school).

What I struggle with is the limiting factor of budgets and how that plays out. What happens when 5 kids are advanced enough to want a specific class that isn’t offered in their school? Is MC the option (I would support that)? What happens when there isn’t a technical program at a school with a student particularly interested in nursing? Everything cannot be everywhere. But busing and peeling off the most motivated kids is also problematic. So where’s the happy medium?

I don't think it's so much a matter of a happy medium as much as being thoughtful about how to address student needs equitably, instead of trying to achieve uniformity on a very surface level as their proposal attempts to do. The analysis they did does not acknowledge the differences between what Whitman kids have access to and what Northwood kids have access to. The DCC ameliorated those differences a little though in an inequitable way. Now they want to get rid of the DCC and set up a system that is even more inequitable.

Do we need a "humanities magnet" in every region? That seems odd to me since humanities is a core feature of the general education curriculum. Think about all the impacts of putting these humanities magnets (exclusively in high income schools btw) - I truly only see negatives.

I do not have the time or expertise to design a more equitable system but I know inequity when I see it and this model as inequity written all over it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS school profiles lists a capacity of 1000 for Edison HS and an enrollment of 968. They don't have empty space. Maybe they only use half of the classrooms at any given time so they will have teachers share the classrooms? Can't MCPS just give a straight answer on this?

It sounds like there is some unbuilt space from what people are saying here, so they'd have to build it into classrooms. Its a trade school drawing students who are bused there from all over the county. They could maybe build it out but with what funds? It would make sense to build it out and offer more trade programs.

Right. First MCPS says they need to build the space. Then they say they are sending 500 Wheaton HS students to Edison CTE programs while simultaneously telling people they are going to keep Edison open to students countywide and putting out a CIP that includes $0 in funding to "build out" Edison. The story keeps changing. I suspect the real story is some people in North Bethesda insisted on keeping their schools 20%-30% empty despite systemwide declining enrollment, and the only way to make that work is to pretend there are 500 extra seats in Edison for Wheaton HS students to take...some kind of classes.

This is why the regional program doesn't work. They should offer advanced classes equally at all schools and keep the DCC and let the other schools do their own consortia. The idea of making it equitable and equal will not happen. This is all for show. Wheaton is a good school. They make it work now.

advanced classes at all schools means no need for consortia, including the DCC. the money for admin and buses can be spent at home schools

Correct, but MCPS is clear that they aren't expanding the course offerings so the corsortia is necessary.

consortia have not met their goals. time for something new

They did expand course offerings available to students who could travel. The regional model just makes the courses available to fewer kids with less transportation.

Students shouldn’t have to travel and there is no guarantee students will get into the schools they need to.

Which is the same as for the consortia model/DCC.

DP. No, it is not the same. The DCC offers more flexibility to students and transportation from students' neighborhoods. The regional program model offers very limited spots and very limited transportation. I happen to think they should get rid of the DCC, but also that they should not create all these programs. Instead they should do a more rigorous analysis of what the different schools offer in terms of coursework and certifications and address gaps as they occur instead of trying to superimpose a model that is intended to be uniform on schools and regions that are all very different.

I agree with you in the getting rid of consortia/magnets/regions, and on doing more analysis to see what individual schools need (with an eye toward improving individual schools so that kids don’t feel like they have to go to another school).

What I struggle with is the limiting factor of budgets and how that plays out. What happens when 5 kids are advanced enough to want a specific class that isn’t offered in their school? Is MC the option (I would support that)? What happens when there isn’t a technical program at a school with a student particularly interested in nursing? Everything cannot be everywhere. But busing and peeling off the most motivated kids is also problematic. So where’s the happy medium?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS school profiles lists a capacity of 1000 for Edison HS and an enrollment of 968. They don't have empty space. Maybe they only use half of the classrooms at any given time so they will have teachers share the classrooms? Can't MCPS just give a straight answer on this?

It sounds like there is some unbuilt space from what people are saying here, so they'd have to build it into classrooms. Its a trade school drawing students who are bused there from all over the county. They could maybe build it out but with what funds? It would make sense to build it out and offer more trade programs.

Right. First MCPS says they need to build the space. Then they say they are sending 500 Wheaton HS students to Edison CTE programs while simultaneously telling people they are going to keep Edison open to students countywide and putting out a CIP that includes $0 in funding to "build out" Edison. The story keeps changing. I suspect the real story is some people in North Bethesda insisted on keeping their schools 20%-30% empty despite systemwide declining enrollment, and the only way to make that work is to pretend there are 500 extra seats in Edison for Wheaton HS students to take...some kind of classes.

This is why the regional program doesn't work. They should offer advanced classes equally at all schools and keep the DCC and let the other schools do their own consortia. The idea of making it equitable and equal will not happen. This is all for show. Wheaton is a good school. They make it work now.

advanced classes at all schools means no need for consortia, including the DCC. the money for admin and buses can be spent at home schools

Correct, but MCPS is clear that they aren't expanding the course offerings so the corsortia is necessary.

consortia have not met their goals. time for something new

They did expand course offerings available to students who could travel. The regional model just makes the courses available to fewer kids with less transportation.

Students shouldn’t have to travel and there is no guarantee students will get into the schools they need to.

Which is the same as for the consortia model/DCC.

DP. No, it is not the same. The DCC offers more flexibility to students and transportation from students' neighborhoods. The regional program model offers very limited spots and very limited transportation. I happen to think they should get rid of the DCC, but also that they should not create all these programs. Instead they should do a more rigorous analysis of what the different schools offer in terms of coursework and certifications and address gaps as they occur instead of trying to superimpose a model that is intended to be uniform on schools and regions that are all very different.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS school profiles lists a capacity of 1000 for Edison HS and an enrollment of 968. They don't have empty space. Maybe they only use half of the classrooms at any given time so they will have teachers share the classrooms? Can't MCPS just give a straight answer on this?

It sounds like there is some unbuilt space from what people are saying here, so they'd have to build it into classrooms. Its a trade school drawing students who are bused there from all over the county. They could maybe build it out but with what funds? It would make sense to build it out and offer more trade programs.

Right. First MCPS says they need to build the space. Then they say they are sending 500 Wheaton HS students to Edison CTE programs while simultaneously telling people they are going to keep Edison open to students countywide and putting out a CIP that includes $0 in funding to "build out" Edison. The story keeps changing. I suspect the real story is some people in North Bethesda insisted on keeping their schools 20%-30% empty despite systemwide declining enrollment, and the only way to make that work is to pretend there are 500 extra seats in Edison for Wheaton HS students to take...some kind of classes.

This is why the regional program doesn't work. They should offer advanced classes equally at all schools and keep the DCC and let the other schools do their own consortia. The idea of making it equitable and equal will not happen. This is all for show. Wheaton is a good school. They make it work now.

advanced classes at all schools means no need for consortia, including the DCC. the money for admin and buses can be spent at home schools

Correct, but MCPS is clear that they aren't expanding the course offerings so the corsortia is necessary.

consortia have not met their goals. time for something new

They did expand course offerings available to students who could travel. The regional model just makes the courses available to fewer kids with less transportation.

Students shouldn’t have to travel and there is no guarantee students will get into the schools they need to.

Which is the same as for the consortia model/DCC.