^^^ Plus, yes, we recognize you. You're the Poolesville troll who derails so many MCPS threads to vent your spite towards Blair.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish that the Blair troll would at least be more interesting. Trolling is bad enough, but boring trolling is worse.

Blair can keep trying to BS the populace or name calling anyone who points out the worsening learning environment.

One thing the nasties can do is refute the truth.

PP was right about most PSAT award winners being Asian.

Um...SO? Please expand on this. It may or may not be true, I don't know why anyone cares and I'm just curious to know why you think it matters?

That poster is so full of it. She has a long history here: she's Asian and she used to live in Blair's Four Corners area but moved north to the Poolesville cluster because she didn't like that minorities were moving into the Blair neighborhood.

Also, she's a toe-curlingly bad sock puppet.

I know many non-Asian NMSSFs at Blair, because I have a kid there. At least Asian PP could use the correct name for it: it's not called a "PSAT award winner", that's just embarrassing: it's called being a National Merit Scholarship Semifinalist (I'm one, and white).

Not a smart National Merit Scholarship Semifinalist as your posting shows. How can you assume you know anything accurate about anonymous posters?!!!

And, you need to check your facts. The National Merit Scholarship Semifinalists at Blair, as a PP suggested are mainly Asian.

Oy!!!

Half Asian, not mainly Asian: http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Beat/2014/MCPS-Announces-National-Merit-Scholarship-Semifinalists/

And putting "Oy" doesn't fool anybody.

^19:41. The pdf file won't let me cut and paste but i was mostly concerned about what i read in chapters 1 and 2... where it talks about "equity" issue (bottom of chapter 2) and conducting reviews to assess whether the current programs meet the original purpose...etc. Just a couple of examples but it's all over the RFP. I, personally, read these as precursors to propose changes to the special programs down the road.

I think you need to read this RFP within the context of what's going on with MCPS now days with large influx of new students it needs to serve without additional funds. Money is tight, size is of MCPS is increasing, and, I think, MCPS is looking for areas to "reinvent" - and the special program maybe on the table.

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who think MCPS will not touch the magnets, have you read the RFP? It is written/implied first few pages as clear as any bureaucratic documents can get. Again, it's not about Blair. It's about ALL special programs. You don't see it?

Could you please cite the relevant passages?

This month there is an interview with Starr about this issue in Washingtonian magazine.

For those of you who think MCPS will not touch the magnets, have you read the RFP? It is written/implied first few pages as clear as any bureaucratic documents can get. Again, it's not about Blair. It's about ALL special programs. You don't see it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure that this study isn't all about Blair even though the thread is. I wonder if it's more about immersion.

I think the whole immersion thing actually precipitated the study -- the controversy over allowing kids to go on to high school in the same cluster as their immersion program in middle school.

I wish they would do something about the sibling preference. I am at an immersion school and in the incoming K class there are only 5 kids who don't have siblings that are or have been in the program. In a couple of cases the older sibling is years older (like high school) so there is no logistical benefit. The chances of having this available to new families is so remote.

the sibling preference is only valid if the older sibling is still at the school, so those kids would have had to have gotten in via the lottery.

Not true. I know three kids- 2 with high school aged siblings and one with a middle schooler. Got in through preference not lottery

The Blair troll has a distinctive style. Either that, or there are various posters who say exactly the same thing in the same distinctive style. I guess that's possible.

Here's a link to the National Merit Semifinalists:

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Beat/2014/MCPS-Announces-National-Merit-Scholarship-Semifinalists/

I'm not going to go through the list to determine who is "Asian" and who isn't, especially because I have no idea why it would matter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish that the Blair troll would at least be more interesting. Trolling is bad enough, but boring trolling is worse.

Blair can keep trying to BS the populace or name calling anyone who points out the worsening learning environment.

One thing the nasties can do is refute the truth.

PP was right about most PSAT award winners being Asian.

Um...SO? Please expand on this. It may or may not be true, I don't know why anyone cares and I'm just curious to know why you think it matters?

That poster is so full of it. She has a long history here: she's Asian and she used to live in Blair's Four Corners area but moved north to the Poolesville cluster because she didn't like that minorities were moving into the Blair neighborhood.

Also, she's a toe-curlingly bad sock puppet.

I know many non-Asian NMSSFs at Blair, because I have a kid there. At least Asian PP could use the correct name for it: it's not called a "PSAT award winner", that's just embarrassing: it's called being a National Merit Scholarship Semifinalist (I'm one, and white).

Not a smart National Merit Scholarship Semifinalist as your posting shows. How can you assume you know anything accurate about anonymous posters?!!!

And, you need to check your facts. The National Merit Scholarship Semifinalists at Blair, as a PP suggested are mainly Asian.

Oy!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure that this study isn't all about Blair even though the thread is. I wonder if it's more about immersion.

I think the whole immersion thing actually precipitated the study -- the controversy over allowing kids to go on to high school in the same cluster as their immersion program in middle school.

I wish they would do something about the sibling preference. I am at an immersion school and in the incoming K class there are only 5 kids who don't have siblings that are or have been in the program. In a couple of cases the older sibling is years older (like high school) so there is no logistical benefit. The chances of having this available to new families is so remote.

the sibling preference is only valid if the older sibling is still at the school, so those kids would have had to have gotten in via the lottery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't know about Blair magnet but they definitely killed the elementary magnet at TP. It is desperately watered down and nothing more than bragging rights.

The principal who watered down TP is now at Blair doing the same thing.

PP is talking about the ELEMENTARY magnet. Please pay better attention while trolling.

It seems that the Blair wackos are trolling really hard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't know about Blair magnet but they definitely killed the elementary magnet at TP. It is desperately watered down and nothing more than bragging rights.

The principal who watered down TP is now at Blair doing the same thing.

PP is talking about the ELEMENTARY magnet. Please pay better attention while trolling.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure that this study isn't all about Blair even though the thread is. I wonder if it's more about immersion.

I think the whole immersion thing actually precipitated the study -- the controversy over allowing kids to go on to high school in the same cluster as their immersion program in middle school.

I wish they would do something about the sibling preference. I am at an immersion school and in the incoming K class there are only 5 kids who don't have siblings that are or have been in the program. In a couple of cases the older sibling is years older (like high school) so there is no logistical benefit. The chances of having this available to new families is so remote.

Anonymous wrote:Don't know about Blair magnet but they definitely killed the elementary magnet at TP. It is desperately watered down and nothing more than bragging rights.

The principal who watered down TP is now at Blair doing the same thing.

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure that this study isn't all about Blair even though the thread is. I wonder if it's more about immersion.

I think the whole immersion thing actually precipitated the study -- the controversy over allowing kids to go on to high school in the same cluster as their immersion program in middle school.