Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

I can tell you have no experience with “poor” schools. There are academically advanced students at every single school and every single school should offer advanced classes. You might have fewer sections of some courses at some schools, as someone else said, but you don’t not offer advanced classes. And you don’t siphon off advanced learners from “poorer” schools to send them to other schools because that exacerbates the problem.

Not trying to pick a fight here. My personal experience is with Einstein and Northwood. Of course there are academically advanced students there. But they don’t offer as many APs because there aren’t as many students (and parents) clambering for them like there are at WJ and Whitman. I would totally support it if somehow all the schools had to offer the same classes, but I don’t see that ever happening. A school won’t run a class without a certain base number of kids in it.

If only there was a group of education professionals who were in charge of setting standards that all schools have to meet. And if only there was money somewhere for this, it's not like they are currently proposing creating a massive number of new programs and bus routes that few people seem to actually want.

Look, if just forcing every school to offer the same classes would somehow make them all equal — in our incredibly divided county — then it would have happened long ago. It’s not simple. Magnets and special programs, even if they’re in 6 regions rather than countywide, are a way to meet kids’ needs.

These aren’t real magnets except a few. They are magnets in name only. And only a select few will benefit from the regional program with most going to their home schools. If this happens will pull out youngest as we didn’t understand the limited classes with our older one and irs been a struggle to even get enough classes to graduate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

I can tell you have no experience with “poor” schools. There are academically advanced students at every single school and every single school should offer advanced classes. You might have fewer sections of some courses at some schools, as someone else said, but you don’t not offer advanced classes. And you don’t siphon off advanced learners from “poorer” schools to send them to other schools because that exacerbates the problem.

Not trying to pick a fight here. My personal experience is with Einstein and Northwood. Of course there are academically advanced students there. But they don’t offer as many APs because there aren’t as many students (and parents) clambering for them like there are at WJ and Whitman. I would totally support it if somehow all the schools had to offer the same classes, but I don’t see that ever happening. A school won’t run a class without a certain base number of kids in it.

They do run classes without full classes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

What would it take in an ideal world to meet those needs at home schools?

A large majority of students at every school would come from a loving, supportive, financially stable home, with involved parents who value education, know how to help their children succeed, and are dedicated to doing just that. Most children at each school would come to school ready to learn and would prioritize academic success and embrace a rigorous curriculum.

Every school would have the same resources; not just funding, but competent staff, most of whom are dedicated to going above and beyond for their students and have a wide range of interests and expertise, as well as substantial ongoing parental involvement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

I can tell you have no experience with “poor” schools. There are academically advanced students at every single school and every single school should offer advanced classes. You might have fewer sections of some courses at some schools, as someone else said, but you don’t not offer advanced classes. And you don’t siphon off advanced learners from “poorer” schools to send them to other schools because that exacerbates the problem.

Not trying to pick a fight here. My personal experience is with Einstein and Northwood. Of course there are academically advanced students there. But they don’t offer as many APs because there aren’t as many students (and parents) clambering for them like there are at WJ and Whitman. I would totally support it if somehow all the schools had to offer the same classes, but I don’t see that ever happening. A school won’t run a class without a certain base number of kids in it.

If only there was a group of education professionals who were in charge of setting standards that all schools have to meet. And if only there was money somewhere for this, it's not like they are currently proposing creating a massive number of new programs and bus routes that few people seem to actually want.

Look, if just forcing every school to offer the same classes would somehow make them all equal — in our incredibly divided county — then it would have happened long ago. It’s not simple. Magnets and special programs, even if they’re in 6 regions rather than countywide, are a way to meet kids’ needs.

They don't need to have equal outcomes. They do need to offer reasonably equivalent experiences & opportunities.

A question that really should be investigated prior to moving forward with the current regionalized magnet effort is:

Which approach (or what blemded approach) better would meet needs in a manner such that 1) a set of broadly representative students, across abilities, backgrounds, interests, etc., would have their particular needs met at reasonably equivalent levels among them, and 2) that same set of broadly representative students would have those needs met at very similar levels, all aspects considered (e.g., to include travel obligation/impact on other experiences such as extracurricular participation), no matter where in the county they lived?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

I can tell you have no experience with “poor” schools. There are academically advanced students at every single school and every single school should offer advanced classes. You might have fewer sections of some courses at some schools, as someone else said, but you don’t not offer advanced classes. And you don’t siphon off advanced learners from “poorer” schools to send them to other schools because that exacerbates the problem.

Not trying to pick a fight here. My personal experience is with Einstein and Northwood. Of course there are academically advanced students there. But they don’t offer as many APs because there aren’t as many students (and parents) clambering for them like there are at WJ and Whitman. I would totally support it if somehow all the schools had to offer the same classes, but I don’t see that ever happening. A school won’t run a class without a certain base number of kids in it.

If only there was a group of education professionals who were in charge of setting standards that all schools have to meet. And if only there was money somewhere for this, it's not like they are currently proposing creating a massive number of new programs and bus routes that few people seem to actually want.

Look, if just forcing every school to offer the same classes would somehow make them all equal — in our incredibly divided county — then it would have happened long ago. It’s not simple. Magnets and special programs, even if they’re in 6 regions rather than countywide, are a way to meet kids’ needs.

If these 6 magnets are to meet kids needs, the criteria should be the same as what it is now for Poolesville and Blair. You can't just give the host schools spots. And they should not have one ghetto region (Region 5). If QO is the strongest performer in that whole region that is saying something.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

I can tell you have no experience with “poor” schools. There are academically advanced students at every single school and every single school should offer advanced classes. You might have fewer sections of some courses at some schools, as someone else said, but you don’t not offer advanced classes. And you don’t siphon off advanced learners from “poorer” schools to send them to other schools because that exacerbates the problem.

Not trying to pick a fight here. My personal experience is with Einstein and Northwood. Of course there are academically advanced students there. But they don’t offer as many APs because there aren’t as many students (and parents) clambering for them like there are at WJ and Whitman. I would totally support it if somehow all the schools had to offer the same classes, but I don’t see that ever happening. A school won’t run a class without a certain base number of kids in it.

If only there was a group of education professionals who were in charge of setting standards that all schools have to meet. And if only there was money somewhere for this, it's not like they are currently proposing creating a massive number of new programs and bus routes that few people seem to actually want.

Look, if just forcing every school to offer the same classes would somehow make them all equal — in our incredibly divided county — then it would have happened long ago. It’s not simple. Magnets and special programs, even if they’re in 6 regions rather than countywide, are a way to meet kids’ needs.

it's complicated because MCPS is unwilling to invest significant amounts of money into high poverty high schools. We do not need all of these programs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

I can tell you have no experience with “poor” schools. There are academically advanced students at every single school and every single school should offer advanced classes. You might have fewer sections of some courses at some schools, as someone else said, but you don’t not offer advanced classes. And you don’t siphon off advanced learners from “poorer” schools to send them to other schools because that exacerbates the problem.

Not trying to pick a fight here. My personal experience is with Einstein and Northwood. Of course there are academically advanced students there. But they don’t offer as many APs because there aren’t as many students (and parents) clambering for them like there are at WJ and Whitman. I would totally support it if somehow all the schools had to offer the same classes, but I don’t see that ever happening. A school won’t run a class without a certain base number of kids in it.

If only there was a group of education professionals who were in charge of setting standards that all schools have to meet. And if only there was money somewhere for this, it's not like they are currently proposing creating a massive number of new programs and bus routes that few people seem to actually want.

Look, if just forcing every school to offer the same classes would somehow make them all equal — in our incredibly divided county — then it would have happened long ago. It’s not simple. Magnets and special programs, even if they’re in 6 regions rather than countywide, are a way to meet kids’ needs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

I can tell you have no experience with “poor” schools. There are academically advanced students at every single school and every single school should offer advanced classes. You might have fewer sections of some courses at some schools, as someone else said, but you don’t not offer advanced classes. And you don’t siphon off advanced learners from “poorer” schools to send them to other schools because that exacerbates the problem.

Traditional magnets solve this problem by putting the programs in the poor schools!

Rich kids transport or stay home in their "regular" programs that are as good as an "average" magnet, and poor kids are local to the magnet

It’s overly glib to think that’s a solution. That just siphons some advanced kids off from other similar schools leaving a smaller advanced cohort behind. And it doesn’t help the kids at the school that houses the magnet who don’t get into the magnet because MCPS inevitably will make it a lottery or not offer enough seats for the number of kids who qualify. Just offer advanced courses at all schools and call it a day!

DP I mean it does bring in staff who are qualified to teach advanced courses. And I assume kids in magnet programs don't take every single course as a cohort?

That being said I agree that magnets are not a good solution. MCPS should end magnets instead of

- creating a bunch of new ones and
- putting many of the academic magnets in high income schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

I can tell you have no experience with “poor” schools. There are academically advanced students at every single school and every single school should offer advanced classes. You might have fewer sections of some courses at some schools, as someone else said, but you don’t not offer advanced classes. And you don’t siphon off advanced learners from “poorer” schools to send them to other schools because that exacerbates the problem.

Traditional magnets solve this problem by putting the programs in the poor schools!

Rich kids transport or stay home in their "regular" programs that are as good as an "average" magnet, and poor kids are local to the magnet

It’s overly glib to think that’s a solution. That just siphons some advanced kids off from other similar schools leaving a smaller advanced cohort behind. And it doesn’t help the kids at the school that houses the magnet who don’t get into the magnet because MCPS inevitably will make it a lottery or not offer enough seats for the number of kids who qualify. Just offer advanced courses at all schools and call it a day!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

I can tell you have no experience with “poor” schools. There are academically advanced students at every single school and every single school should offer advanced classes. You might have fewer sections of some courses at some schools, as someone else said, but you don’t not offer advanced classes. And you don’t siphon off advanced learners from “poorer” schools to send them to other schools because that exacerbates the problem.

Not trying to pick a fight here. My personal experience is with Einstein and Northwood. Of course there are academically advanced students there. But they don’t offer as many APs because there aren’t as many students (and parents) clambering for them like there are at WJ and Whitman. I would totally support it if somehow all the schools had to offer the same classes, but I don’t see that ever happening. A school won’t run a class without a certain base number of kids in it.

If only there was a group of education professionals who were in charge of setting standards that all schools have to meet. And if only there was money somewhere for this, it's not like they are currently proposing creating a massive number of new programs and bus routes that few people seem to actually want.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

I can tell you have no experience with “poor” schools. There are academically advanced students at every single school and every single school should offer advanced classes. You might have fewer sections of some courses at some schools, as someone else said, but you don’t not offer advanced classes. And you don’t siphon off advanced learners from “poorer” schools to send them to other schools because that exacerbates the problem.

Traditional magnets solve this problem by putting the programs in the poor schools!

Rich kids transport or stay home in their "regular" programs that are as good as an "average" magnet, and poor kids are local to the magnet

That's why it's so stupid for them to put academic magnets in rich schools like Whitman and leave them out of less-wealthy schools like Northwood. It does the opposite.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t support this because the losers will be advanced kids in poor schools. They will never have the class options that their counterparts in rich schools do, because classes are based on demand. Magnets help those kids.

I can tell you have no experience with “poor” schools. There are academically advanced students at every single school and every single school should offer advanced classes. You might have fewer sections of some courses at some schools, as someone else said, but you don’t not offer advanced classes. And you don’t siphon off advanced learners from “poorer” schools to send them to other schools because that exacerbates the problem.

Not trying to pick a fight here. My personal experience is with Einstein and Northwood. Of course there are academically advanced students there. But they don’t offer as many APs because there aren’t as many students (and parents) clambering for them like there are at WJ and Whitman. I would totally support it if somehow all the schools had to offer the same classes, but I don’t see that ever happening. A school won’t run a class without a certain base number of kids in it.